2008
DOI: 10.1007/s00254-008-1432-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Groundwater vulnerability assessment in shallow aquifer of Kathmandu Valley using GIS-based DRASTIC model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
42
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This method relies heavily on the analysts' subjective judgements regarding the relevance of each of the variables for the pollution potential, by assessing its contribution to the hydrological processes that determine the fate of pollutants. Thus, the results have been questioned by some researchers who had attempted to improve the DRASTIC index system (Napolitano and Fabbri 1996, Gogu and Dassargues 2000, Di Martino et al 2005, Panagopoulos et al 2006, Mohammadi et al 2009, Pathak et al 2009). The uncertainty of the DRASTIC method mainly comes from the subjective nature of assigning weights and ratings, as shown in equation (1).…”
Section: Classic Drastic and Fuzzy-optimization Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This method relies heavily on the analysts' subjective judgements regarding the relevance of each of the variables for the pollution potential, by assessing its contribution to the hydrological processes that determine the fate of pollutants. Thus, the results have been questioned by some researchers who had attempted to improve the DRASTIC index system (Napolitano and Fabbri 1996, Gogu and Dassargues 2000, Di Martino et al 2005, Panagopoulos et al 2006, Mohammadi et al 2009, Pathak et al 2009). The uncertainty of the DRASTIC method mainly comes from the subjective nature of assigning weights and ratings, as shown in equation (1).…”
Section: Classic Drastic and Fuzzy-optimization Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been successfully applied to many different geographical locations in the world, including the USA (Loague et al 1996, Frind et al 2006, Japan (Babiker et al 2005, Pathak et al 2009), Europe (Crema et al 1998, Di Martino et al 2005, Panagopoulos et al 2006, South Korea (Kim andHamm 1999, Lee 2003), South Africa (Lynch et al 1994), Iran (Mohammadi et al 2009) and China (Chen and Fu 2003, Wang et al 2007, Yu et al 2010.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, we know that for vulnerability evaluation, when the water ta- Figure 8. Flow chart of methodology adopted to develop the groundwater contamination potential map using DRASTIC and fuzzy pattern recognition models in the framework of GIS (source Pathak et al, 2009). ble is shallow, the recharge rate is high, and if aquifer and soil materials are coarser, groundwater potential for pollution is higher. Also if the hydraulic conductivity, recharge rate and slope are low then the groundwater potential for pollution is low.…”
Section: Vulnerability Assessment By the Fuzzy Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, membership expresses the relations between two given parameters and also the degree of truth or falseness of these relations (Pacheco et al, 2015;Madhumita et al, 2016). This technique has been used by many authors -such as Pacheco et al (2015), Madhumita et al (2016), Pathak et al (2009), Sahoo et al (2016a, Saidi et al (2011) and Sener et al (2013) -but most of these studies assessed pollution risk Van der Weijden, 2011, 2012) and did not compare intrinsic with specific vulnerability or different types of sensitivity analyses with memberships to identify parameter impact on groundwater vulnerability to pollution.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, acceptable estimate of static groundwater storage could be made with relatively fewer resources using readily available secondary data, information and geographic information system (GIS) tool(s). GIS and GIS-based tools are widely used in groundwater studies to analyze and visualize results of groundwater vulnerability (e.g., Kattaa et al 2010;Nobre et al 2007;Pathak et al 2009), groundwater storage potential (e.g., Singh and Prakash 2002;Wahyuni et al 2008), groundwater flow and contaminant transport modeling (e.g. Akbar et al 2011;Chenini and Mammou 2010), among others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%