4.5 Article

Development and assessment of rainwater harvesting suitability map using analytical hierarchy process, GIS and RS techniques

Journal

GEOCARTO INTERNATIONAL
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages 421-448

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10106049.2019.1608591

Keywords

Rainwater harvesting; AHP; arid regions; suitability map; pairwise comparison

Funding

  1. National Plan for Science, Technology, and Innovation (MAARIFAH) - King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology - the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [11-WAT1999-03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study aims to develop a suitability map of rainwater harvesting sites for a basin in Saudi Arabia, using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to identify and assign weights to criteria. Results showed that excellent and good sites covered about 40.6% of the total available sites, with curve number, slope, rainfall, and soil being the most influential criteria.
Rainwater harvesting (RWH), which is the collection and storage of rainwater for multiple purposes, is gaining recognition in water supply issues. Selection of harvesting sites is the most critical factor in RWH projects. The objective of this study is to develop a suitability map of RWH sites for a basin in Saudi Arabia. The method used, constitute the identification and assigning weights to criteria, and generation of suitability map using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Eight appropriate criteria were considered. Results showed that excellent and good sites covered about 40.6% of the total available sites. Sensitivity analysis showed that the curve number (CN), slope, rainfall and soil were the most influential criteria. The maximum increase in the percentage area of excellent sites was 92% while good and moderate classes decreased by 43 and 53%, respectively. The developed suitability maps provide useful information to the decision maker for use in water management.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available