Using Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis and Ranking Tool (SMART) in earthquake risk assessment: a case study of Delhi region, India

References

• Aceves-Quesada JF, Díaz-Salgad J, López-Blanco J. 2007. Vulnerability assessment in a volcanic risk evaluation in Central Mexico through a multi-criteria-GIS approach. Nat Hazards. 40:339–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ADB. 2005. An initial assessment of the impact of the eathquake and Tsunami of December 26, 2004 on South and Southeast Asia [Internet]. Asian Development Bank. Available from: http://internationalbudget.org/wp-content/uploads/An-Initial-Assessment-of-the-Impact-of-the-Earthquake-and-Tsunami-of-December-26-2004-on-South-and-Southeast-Asia.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Anbazhagan P, Gajawada P, Parihar A. 2011. Seismic hazard map of Coimbatore using subsurface fault rupture. Nat Hazards. 60:1325–1345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armas I. 2011. An analytic multicriteria hierarchical approach to assess landslide vulnerability. Case study: Cornu Village, Subcarpathian Prahova Valley/Romania. Z Geomorphol. 55:209–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkmann J. 2007. Risk and Vulnerability indicators at different scales: applicability, usefulness and policy implications. Environ Hazard. 7:20–31.
   Google Scholar
• [BMTPC] Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council. 1997. Vulnerability atlas of India [Internet]. New Delhi: Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India. Available from: http://www.ndmindia.nic.in/techAdvGroup/difexpgrp/VulAtlas2006.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Caterino J, You S, Neumann U. 2006. Approaches to large-scale urban modelling. IEEE Comput Graph Appl. 23:62–69.
   Google Scholar
• Erden T, Karaman H. 2011. Analysis of earthquake parameters to generate hazard maps by integrating AHP and GIS for Kucukcekmece region. Nat Haz Earth Sys Sci. 12:475–483.
   Google Scholar
• Erlingsson U. 2007. Comment to outburst flooding and the initiation of ice-stream surges in response to climatic cooling: a hypothesis. Geomorphology. 86:214–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [FEMA] Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2002. Rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic hazards – a handbook. Redwood (CA): Federal Emergency Management Agency; p. 154. February, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Giovinazzi S, Lagomarsino S, Pampanin S. 2006. Vulnerability methods and damage scenario for seismic risk analysis as support to retrofit strategies: an European perspective. In: Proceedings of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering Conference; Napier. Available from: http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/439
   Google Scholar
• Hizbaron DR, Baiquni M, Sartohadi J, Rijanta1 R, Coy M. 2011. Assessing social vulnerability to seismic hazard through spatial multi criteria evaluation in Bantul district; Tropentag; 2011 Oct 5–7.
   Google Scholar
• Jankowski P, Andrienko N, Andrienko G. 2001. Map-centered exploratory approach to multiple criteria spatial decision making. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 15:101–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malczewski J. 1999. GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. New York (NY): John Wiley and Sons; p. 392.
   Google Scholar
• Martins VN, Silva DS, Cabral P. 2012. Social vulnerability assessment to seismic risk using multicriteria analysis: the case study of Vila Franca does Campo (São Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal). Nat Hazard. 3:26–45.
   Google Scholar
• Parvez IA, Vaccari F, Panza GF. 2003. A deterministic seismic hazard map of India and adjacent areas. Geophys J Int. 155:489–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peduzzi P, Dao H, Herold C, Mouton F. 2009. Assessing global exposure and vulnerability towards natural hazards: the disaster risk index. Nat Hazard Earth Syst Sci. 9:1149–1159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira JMC, Ducktein L. 1993. A multiple criteria decision- making approach to GIs-based land suitability evaluation. Int J Geogr Inf Sys. 7:407–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prevention Web. 2011. Revealing risk, redefining development. In: Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction for UNISDR. New York (NY): International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR); p. 1–178. Available from: www.preventionweb.net/gar
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. 1980. The analytical hierarchy process. New York (NY): McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL. 2000. Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. 2nd ed. Pittsburg (PA): RWS Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty TL, Vargas LG. 1993. Experiments on rank preservation and reversal in relative measurement. Math and Comput Model. 17:13–18.
   Google Scholar
• Vadrevu KP, Eaturu A, Badarinath KVS. 2009. Fire risk evaluation using multicriteria analysis – a case study. Environ Monit Assess. Available from http://www.colorado.edu/geography/leyk/geog_5113/readings/vadrevu_etal_2009_EnvMonAss.pdf
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yalcin G. 2002. Analyzing flood vulnerable areas with multicriteria evaluation [dissertation]. Ankara: Middle East Technical University. Available from: http://www.isprs.org/istanbul2004/comm2/papers/154.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zhu X, Aspinall RJ, Hdey RG. 1996. ILUDSS: a knowledge-based spatial decision support system for strategic land use planning. Comput Electron Agric. 15:279–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar