Integrating analytical hierarchical process and quadrant matrix analysis in a decision analytics framework for flood management planning

Mohammad Fikry Abdullah; Zurina Zainol; Bashirah Mohd Fazli; Amri Md Shah; Siaw Yin Thian; Fazillah Mohmad Kamal

doi:10.32890/jcia2026.5.1.4

Authors

Mohammad Fikry Abdullah University of Leeds, National Water Research Institute of Malaysia, Malaysia
Zurina Zainol National Water Research Institute of Malaysia, Malaysia
Bashirah Mohd Fazli National Water Research Institute of Malaysia, Malaysia
Amri Md Shah University of Western Australia, Australia
Siaw Yin Thian National Water Research Institute of Malaysia, Malaysia
Fazillah Mohmad Kamal Universiti Utara Malaysia, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/jcia2026.5.1.4

Keywords:

AHP, criteria analysis, decision making, flood management planning, quadrant matrix analysis

Abstract

Flood management planning (FMP) requires decision analytics approaches that can prioritize multiple criteria while accounting for uncertainty in expert judgment and data availability. This study presents a decision analytics framework that integrates the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Quadrant Matrix Analysis (QMA) to identify key flood and trade-off criteria, and to develop a structural plan to support FMP decision making. Using the PESTEL framework, a refined set of 40 criteria was assessed through structured elicitation involving 10 experts from diverse disciplines. AHP was applied to find the relative importance of each criterion, while QMA mapped the criteria by both importance and certainty. The AHP results indicate that the Political, Legal, and Economic domains were the main driving criteria for FMP. At the criterion level, P1: Fair distribution of resources was ranked first (0.1917), followed by L1: Land ownership for flood protection (0.0739) and L4: International constitutional standards and guidelines (0.0543). QMA, in contrast, identified 25 “Must‑Have” criteria, primarily within the Environmental, Social, and Technological domains. A comparison of AHP and QMA outputs reveals that criterion certainty significantly affects practical applicability, even for criteria that are highly ranked in importance. By jointly considering importance and certainty, EC7: Economic loss, EC5: Financial budget, and L3: Flood Disaster Institutional emerged as "Very Highly Ranked" and "Must-Have". The framework also incorporates a structured criterion‑reflection stage, informed by the Weather Model, to refine expert evaluations. Overall, the proposed decision analytics framework enhances clarity and consistency in the selection of criteria and offers practical guidance for FMP in Malaysia and other planning contexts.

References

Abdullah, M. F., Siraj, S., & Hodgett, R. E. (2021). An overview of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) application in managing water-related disaster events: Analyzing 20 years of literature for flood and drought events. Water, 13(10), 1358. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13101358

Abdullah, M. F., Zainol, Z., Thian, S. Y., Ab Ghani, N. H., Mat Jusoh, A., Mat Amin, M. Z., & Mohamad, N. A. (2022). Big data in criteria selection and identification in managing flood disaster events based on macro domain PESTEL analysis: Case study of Malaysia Adaptation Index. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 6(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc6010025

Abu El-Magd, S. A., Amer, R. A., & Embaby, A. (2020). Multi-criteria decision-making for the analysis of flash floods: A case study of Awlad Toq-Sherq, Southeast Sohag, Egypt. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 162, 103709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2019.103709

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (Eds.). (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. Kogan Page.

CRED. (2023). EM-DAT: The International Disaster Database. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. https://public.emdat.be/

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process (Rev. ed.). D. C. Heath and Company.

Dockalikova, I., & Klozikova, J. (2014). MCDM methods in practice: Determining the significance of PESTEL analysis criteria. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance (ECMLG 2014) (pp. 418–427). Academic Conferences and Publishing International.

Hammami, S., Zouhri, L., Souissi, D., Souei, A., Zghibi, A., Marzougui, A., & Dlala, M. (2019). Application of the GIS based multi-criteria decision analysis and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) in the flood susceptibility mapping (Tunisia). Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 12(21), 653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-019-4754-9

Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(94)00012-U

Iacovidou, E., Busch, J., Hahladakis, J. N., Baxter, H., Ng, K. S., & Herbert, B. M. J. (2017). A parameter selection framework for sustainability assessment. Sustainability, 9(9), 1497. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9091497

Nasiri Khiavi, A., Vafakhah, M., & Sadeghi, S. H. (2025). Strategic flood management using collaborative game theory: Conjunct application of hydrologic and strategic planning models. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 27(8), 18381–18408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04693-4

Liu, Q., Du, M., Wang, Y., Deng, J., Yan, W., Qin, C., Liu, M., & Liu, J. (2024). Global, regional and national trends and impacts of natural floods, 1990–2022. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 102(6), 410–420. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.23.290243

Lynch, J., Carver, R., Jr., & Virgo, J. M. (1996). Quadrant analysis as a strategic planning technique in curriculum development and program marketing. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 7(2), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1300/J050v07n02_02

Maclean, S. (2016). A new model for social work reflection: Whatever the weather. Professional Social Work, 28–29.

Mann, K., Gordon, J., & MacLeod, A. (2009). Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: A systematic review. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14(4), 595–621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-007-9090-2

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.

Moon, J. A. (1999). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice. Kogan Page.

Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5

Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill.

Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (1998). Diagnosis with dependent symptoms: Bayes theorem and the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Operations Research, 46(4), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.46.4.491

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.

Triantaphyllou, E., & Mann, S. H. (1995). Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process for decision making in engineering applications: Some challenges. International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications, Practice and Management, 2(1), 35–44.

Wedley, W. C. (1990). Combining qualitative and quantitative factors—An analytic hierarchy approach. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 24(1), 57–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0121(90)90028-6

Yang, W. C., Xu, K., Lian, J. J., Ma, C., & Bin, L. L. (2018). Integrated flood vulnerability assessment approach based on TOPSIS and Shannon entropy methods. Ecological Indicators, 89, 269–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.02.015

Zahmatkesh, Z., & Karamouz, M. (2017). An uncertainty-based framework to quantifying climate change impacts on coastal flood vulnerability: Case study of New York City. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 189(11), 567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6282-y