A Comparison of the AHP and BWM Models for the Flash Flood Susceptibility Assessment: A Case Study of the Ibar River Basin in Montenegro
Filip Vujović, Aleksandar Valjarević, Uroš Durlević, Cezar Morar, Vasile Grama, Velibor Spalevıć, Miško Milanović, Dejan Filipović, Golub Ćulafić, Milan Gazdić, Natalija Batoćanin, Goran Barović, Jelena Golijanin, Dragan Radovanović, Nikola Bačević, Ante Šiljeg
Abstract
Assessing flash flood susceptibility is crucial for disaster management, yet Montenegro lacks research using geoinformation technologies. In northeastern Montenegro, the Ibar River Basin, mainly in Rožaje, has a well-developed hydrological network with torrential streams prone to flash flooding. This study compares two multi-criteria GIS decision analysis (GIS–MCDA) methodologies, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Best-Worst Method (BWM), for assessing flood susceptibility. The analysis uses the Flash Flood Susceptibility Index (FFSI), integrating geoenvironmental and climatic factors. The geoenvironmental criteria considered include terrain slope, distance from the drainage network, geology, land cover, drainage density, bare soil index, and the BIO16 variable, which represents the mean monthly precipitation of the wettest quarter to enhance precipitation pattern assessment. The AHP model classifies 2.78% of the area as high to very high susceptibility, while the BWM model identifies 3.21% in these categories. Both models perform excellently based on AUC values, with minor, non-significant differences. Sensitivity analysis shows AHP provides a more stable weight distribution, whereas BWM is more sensitive to weight changes, emphasizing dominant criteria more strongly. This study introduces BWM for the first time in flash flood modeling, demonstrating its suitability for susceptibility assessment. The key novelty lies in its comparative analysis with AHP, highlighting differences in weight distribution and model stability.