Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of groundwater quality using DEA and AHP: a case study in the Sereflikochisar region in Turkey

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated the spatial distribution of groundwater quality in Sereflikochisar Basin, in the Central Anatolian region of Turkey using different hydrochemical, statistical, and geostatistical methods. A total of 51 groundwater samples were collected from the observation wells in the study area to evaluate the characteristics of the groundwater quality. As a relatively simple and practical method, a groundwater quality index (GWQI) was developed to evaluate the overall groundwater quality. In this process, complex decision-making techniques such as analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and data envelopment analysis (DEA) were used. Based on these models, two new indices (A-GWQI and D-GWQI) were proposed. According to the D-GWQI score (from 0.6 to 1), water quality was classified in four categories as unsuitable (0.6–0.7), permissible (0.7–0.8), good (0.8–0.9), and excellent (0.9–1). The spatial distribution maps of the groundwater quality were created using the Kriging method. For each map, seven different semivariogram models were tested and the best-fitted model was chosen based on their root mean square standardized error. These maps showed that the areas with high groundwater quality were in the eastern and southern parts of the study area where the D-GWQI scores were greater than 0.8. Depending on the distance from the Salt Lake, the characteristics of groundwater changed from NaCl to NaHCO3 and CaHCO3 facies. This study shows how to determine the spatial distribution of the groundwater quality and identify the impact of salt lakes on the groundwater quality in inland aquifers. The findings of this study can be applied to ensure the quality of groundwater used for drinking and irrigation purposes in the study area.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abtahi, M., Golchinpour, N., Yaghmaeian, K., Rafiee, M., Jahangiri-rad, M., Keyani, A., & Saeedi, R. (2015). A modified drinking water quality index (DWQI) for assessing drinking source water quality in rural communities of Khuzestan Province, Iran. Ecological Indicators, 53, 283–291.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, E., Agarwal, R., Garg, R. D., & Garg, P. K. (2013). Delineation of groundwater potential zone: an AHP/ANP approach. Journal of Earth System Science, 122(3), 887–898.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldworth, J. (1998). Spatial prediction, spatial sampling, and measurement error. Ph.D. Thesis, Iowa State University, 186 p.

  • Banai-Kashani, R. (1989). A new method for site suitability analysis: the analytic hierarchy process. Environmental Management, 13, 685–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banai, R. (2010). Evaluation of land use–transportation systems with the analytic network process. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 3(1), 85–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, T., & Srivastava, R. (2009). Application of water quality index for assessment of surface water quality surrounding integrated industrial estate-Pantnagar. Water Science and Technology, 60(8), 2041–2053.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R. D., Charnes, R. F., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1078–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, S. (2010). Water utility benchmarking: measurement, methodology, and performance incentives. London: International Water Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., & Seiford, L. M. (1994). Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology, and application. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chica-Olmo, M., Luque-Espinar, J. A., Rodriguez-Galiano, V., Pardo-Iguzquiza, E., & Chica-Rivas, L. (2014). Categorical Indicator Kriging for assessing the risk of groundwater nitrate pollution: the case of Vega de Granada aquifer (SE Spain). Science of the Total Environment, 470, 229–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiles, J. P., & Delfiner, P. (1999). Geostatistics: modeling spatial uncertainty (pp. 449–471). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2000). Data envelopment analysis: a comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cude, C. G. (2001). Oregon water quality index: a tool for evaluating water quality management effectiveness. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 37(1), 125–137.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Do, H. T., Lo, S. L., & Phan Thi, L. A. (2013). Calculating of river water quality sampling frequency by the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 185(1), 909–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esri (2015). ArcMap 10.1 Help File. Online, http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/main/10.1/. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.

  • European Union (2014). Consultation on the quality of drinking water in the EU. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/consultations/water_drink_en.htm. Accessed 2 Aug 2015.

  • Fetter, C.W. (2001). Applied Hydrogeology (4th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson, Higher Education. 598 p.

  • Freeze, R. A., & Cherry, J. A. (1979). Groundwater. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. 604 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Germolec, D. R., Yang, R. S. H., Ackerman, M. F., Rosenthal, G. J., Boorman, G. A., Blair, P., & Luster, M. I. (1989). Toxicology studies of a chemical mixture of 25 groundwater contaminants. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, 13, 377–387.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goovaerts, P., AvRuskin, G., Meliker, J., Slotnick, M., Jacquez, G., & Nriagu, J. (2005). Geostatistical modeling of the spatial variability of arsenic in groundwater of southeast Michigan. Water Resources Research, 41, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton, R. K. (1965). An index number system for rating water quality. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, 37, 300–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussain, M. S., Javadi, A. A., Asr, A. A., & Farmani, R. (2015). A surrogate model for simulation–optimization of aquifer systems subjected to seawater intrusion. Journal of Hydrology, 523, 542–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeihouni, M., Toomanian, A., Shahabi, M., & Alavipanah, S. K. (2014). Groundwater quality assessment for drinking purposes using GIS modelling (case study: city of Tabriz). The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, XL-2/W3, 163–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jha, M. K., Chowdary, V. M., & Chowdhury, A. (2010). Groundwater assessment in Salboni Block, West Bengal (India) using remote sensing, geographical information system and multi-criteria decision analysis techniques. Hydrogéologie, 18(7), 1713–1728.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazmann, R. G. (1972). Modern hydrology (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row. 365 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. J., & Hamm, S. (1999). Assessment of the potential for groundwater contamination using the DRASTIC/EGIS technique, Cheongju area, South Korea. Hydrogeology Journal, 7, 227–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohfahl, C., Post, V. E. A., Hamann, E., Prommer, H., & Simmons, C. T. (2015). Validity and slopes of the linear equation of state for natural brines in salt lake systems. Journal of Hydrology, 523, 190–195.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, T., Gautam, A. K., & Kumar, T. (2014). Appraising the accuracy of GIS-based Multi-criteria decision making technique for delineation of groundwater potential zones. Water Resources Management, 28, 4449–4466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liou, S., Lo, S., & Wang, S. (2004). A generalized water quality index for Taiwan. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 96, 35–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W. W., Joung, H. M., Mahannah, C. N., & Garrett, J. R. (1986). Identification of water quality differences Nevada through index application. Journal of Environmental Quality, 15, 265–272.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nasiri, F., Maqsiid, I., Haunf, G., & Fuller, N. (2007). Water quality index: a fuzzy river pollution decision support expert system. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 133, 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojha, C.S.P., Muller, U., Baldauf, G., & Nad Kuhn, W. (2003). Variation of certain water quality parameters with stream water turbidity: a case study from southern part of Germany. Hydrology and Water Resources, Sherif, Singh & Al- Rashed 251–269

  • Oliver, M. A. (1990). Kriging: a method of interpolation for geographical information systems. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 4, 313–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesce, S. F., & Wunderlin, D. A. (2000). Use of water quality indices to verify the impact of Cordoba City (Argentina) on Suquira River. Water Research, 34, 2915–2926.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pourghasemi, H. R., Pradhan, B., & Gokceoglu, C. (2012). Application of fuzzy logic and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz watershed, Iran. Natural Hazards, 63, 965–996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1986). Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science, 32, 841–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback, the analytic network process. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and applications of the analytic network: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks (p. 47). USA: RWS Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sener, E., & Davraz, A. (2013). Assessment of groundwater vulnerability based on a modified DRASTIC model, GIS and an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method: the case of Egirdir Lake Basin (Isparta, Turkey). Hydrogeology Journal, 21, 701–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shabbir, R., & Ahmad, S. S. (2015). Water resource vulnerability assessment in Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Pakistan using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Journal of King Saud University – Science. doi:10.1016/j.jksus.2015.09.007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, H. D., & Zhu, J. (2013). Analyzing performance in service organizations. Sloan Management Review, 54(4), 37–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soutter, M., & Musy, A. (1998). Coupling 1D Monte-Carlo simulations and geostatistics to assess groundwater vulnerability to pesticide contamination on a regional scale. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 32, 25–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stigter, T. Y., Ribeiro, L., & Dill, A. M. M. C. (2006). Evaluation of an intrinsic and a specific vulnerability assessment method in comparison with groundwater salinisation and nitrate contamination levels in two agricultural regions in the south of Portugal. Hydrogeology Journal, 14, 79–99.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tirkey, P., Gorai, A. K., & Iqbal, J. (2013). AHP-GIS based DRASTIC model for groundwater vulnerability to pollution assessment: a case study of Hazaribag district, Jharkhand, India. International Journal of Environmental Protection, 2(3), 20–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Üstün, A. K. (2015). Evaluating İstanbul’s disaster resilience capacity by data envelopment analysis. Natural Hazards 1–21. doi:10.1007/s11069-015-2041-y

  • Üstün, A. K., & Anagün, A. S. (2015). Multi-objective mitigation budget allocation problem and solution approaches: the case of İstanbul. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 81, 118–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Üstün, A. K., & Barbarosoglu, G. (2015). Performance evaluation of Turkish disaster relief management system in 1999 earthquakes using data envelopment analysis. Natural Hazards, 75(2), 1977–1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WHO/UNICEF (2012). Estimated with data from WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation. Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water, 2012 Update

  • WPCR (2004). Turkish water pollution control regulation, Number of official gazette: 25687 and http://www.cevreorman.gov.tr/yasa/y/25687.doc. Accessed 10 Mar 2016.

  • Yang, C. L., Chuang, S. P., Huang, R. H., & Tai, C. C. (2008). Location selection based on AHP/ANP approach. IEEE, International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Singapore, 1148–1153.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Geological Engineering Department, Aksaray University, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey

    Murat Kavurmaci

  2. Industrial Engineering Department, Aksaray University, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey

    A. Korkut Üstün

Authors
  1. Murat Kavurmaci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Korkut Üstün
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Murat Kavurmaci.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Table 1

(DOCX 32 kb)

Supplementary Table 2

(DOCX 22.7 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kavurmaci, M., Üstün, A.K. Assessment of groundwater quality using DEA and AHP: a case study in the Sereflikochisar region in Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 188, 258 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5259-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-016-5259-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation