Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management

Editor-in-Chief: Renda-Tanali, Irmak

Managing Editor: McGee, Sibel

4 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.712

CiteScore 2017: 0.92

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.242
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.615

See all formats and pricing
More options …

Social Vulnerability Evaluation for Ankang City, China, using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Method

Xuesong Guo
  • Xi’an Jiaotong University, School of Public Policy and Administration, Xi’an, Shaanxi, China
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Naim Kapucu
Published Online: 2018-08-17 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2016-0037


A Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process based model was proposed and evaluated for social vulnerability assessment using a case study. The evaluation process is formulated as a multiple criteria decision making problem under uncertainty, where the subjective and imprecise judgements of multiple decision makers are represented as fuzzy numbers. Based on factors extracted from literature review, the researchers determined the factor weights and calculated social vulnerability scores for each county (district) using the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process method. The researchers demonstrated how the social vulnerability scores of counties (districts) and factor weights change under different uncertainties via sensitivity analysis. The results were comparted with data produced by conventional Analytic Hierarchy Process to test performance of the proposed method. The results show social vulnerability of each county (district) in Ankang City, implying the Urban-Rural Gap exist in current Chinese disaster management system. Most important sub-factors contributing to social vulnerability were also highlighted according to the results on factor weights.

Keywords: analytic hierarchy process (AHP); emergency management; Fuzzy theory; social vulnerability; vulnerability evaluation


  • Aall, C., and I. T. Norland. 2005. Indicators for Local-scale Climate Vulnerability Assessments. Norway: Western Norway Research Institute, University of Oslo.Google Scholar

  • Aliabadi, S. F., A. Sarsangi, and E. Modiri. 2015. “The Social and Physical Vulnerability Assessment of Old Texture Against Earthquake (Case Study: Fahadan District in Yazd City).” Arabian Journal of Geosciences 8 (12): 1–13.Google Scholar

  • Ankang Municipal Government. 2016. Ankang Almanac (2016). Xi’an: San Qin Press.Google Scholar

  • Ankang Statistical Bureau. 2016. Ankang Local Statistical Yearbook (2015). http://www.tjcn.org/tjnj/27sx/34240.html. Retrieved on 10 July, 2016.

  • Bankoff, G. 2001. “Rendering the World Unsafe: “Vulnerability” as Western Discourse.” Disasters 25 (1): 19–35.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Barbara, P. 2009. “Socialist Household Production: Some Implications of the New “Responsibility System” in China.” Ids Bulletin 13 (4): 52–59.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Barzilai, J. 1997. “Deriving Weights from Pairwise Comparison Matrices.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 48 (12): 1226–1232.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bjarnadottir, S., Y. Li, and M. G. Stewart. 2011. “Social Vulnerability Index for Coastal Communities at Risk to Hurricane Hazard and a Changing Climate.” Natural Hazards 59 (2): 1055–1075.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Borden, K. A., M. C. Schmidtlein, C. T. Emrich, W. W. Piegorsch, and S. L. Cutter. 2007. “Vulnerability of U.S. Cities to Environmental Hazards.” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 4(2), Article 5.Google Scholar

  • Buckley, J. J. 1984. “The Multiple Judge, Multiple Criteria Ranking Problem: A Fuzzy Set Approach.” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 13 (13): 25–37.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Buckley, J. J., and Y. Qu. 1990. “On using α-Cuts to Evaluate Fuzzy Equations.” Fuzzy Sets and Systems 38 (3): 309–312.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Burton, C., and S. L. Cutter. 2008. “Levee Failures and Social Vulnerability in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Area, California.” Natural Hazards Review 9 (3): 136–149.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Carlsson, C., and R. Fullér. 2001. “On Possibilistic Mean Value and Variance of Fuzzy Numbers.” Fuzzy Sets and Systems 122 (2): 315–326.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chakraborty, J., G. A. Tobin, and B. E. Montz. 2005. “Population Evacuation: Assessing Spatial Variability in Geophysical Risk and Social Vulnerability to Natural Hazards.” Natural Hazards Review 6 (1): 23–33.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, S. M. 2001. “Fuzzy Group Decision Making for Evaluating the Rate of Aggregative Risk in Software Development.” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 118 (1): 75–88.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, X. P., and C. C. Chen. 2004. “On the Intricacies of the Chinese Guanxi: A Process Model of Guanxi Development.” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 21 (3): 305–324.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cheng, C. H. 1997. “Evaluating Naval Tactical Missile Systems by Fuzzy AHP Based on the Grade Value of Membership Function.” European Journal of Operational Research 96 (2): 343–350.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Clark, G. E., S. C. Moser, S. J. Ratick, K. Dow, W. B. Meyer, S. Emani, W. Jin, J. X. Kasperson, R. E. Kasperson, and H. E. Schwartz. 1998. “Assessing the Vulnerability of Coastal Communities to Extreme Storms: The Case of Revere, MA., USA.” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 3 (1): 59–82.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Collins, T. W., S. E. Grineski, and M. D. L. R. Aguilar. 2009. “Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards in the Ciudad Juárez (Mexico)–El Paso (U.S.A) Metropolis: A Model for Spatial Risk Assessment in Transnational Context.” Applied Geography 29 (3): 448–461.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cozannet, G. L., M. Garcin, T. Bulteau, C. Mirgon, M. L. Yates, M. Méndez, A. Baills, D. Idier, and C. Oliveros. (2013). “An AHP-Derived Method for Mapping the Physical Vulnerability of Coastal Areas at Regional Scales.” Natural Hazards & Earth System Science 13: 1209–1227.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cutter, S. L. 1996. “Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.” Progress in Human Geography 20 (4): 529–539.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cutter, S. L., and C. T. Emrich. 2006. “Moral Hazard, Social Catastrophe: The Changing Face of Vulnerability Along the Hurricane Coasts.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 604 (1): 102–112.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cutter, S. L., and C. Finch. 2008. “Temporal and Spatial Changes in Social Vulnerability to Natural Hazards.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (7): 2301–2306.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cutter, S. L., J. T. Mitchell, and M. S. Scott. 2000. “Revealing the Vulnerability of People and Places: A Case Study of Georgetown County, South Carolina.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90 (4): 713–737.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cutter, S. L., B. J. Boruff, and W. L. Shirley. 2003. “Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.” Social Science Quarterly 84 (2): 242–261.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Cutter, S. L., C. T. Emrich, J. J. Webb, and D. Morath. 2009. Social Vulnerability to Climate Variability Hazards: A Review of the Literature. Final report to Oxfam America http://adapt.oxfamamerica.org/resources/Literature_Review.pdf. Retrieved on 10 June 2011.

  • de Oliveira Mendes, José Manuel. (2009). “Social Vulnerability Indexes as Planning Tools: Beyond the Preparedness Paradigm.” Journal of Risk Research 12 (1): 43–58.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dwyer, A., C. Zoppou, O. Nielsen, S. Day, and S. Roberts. 2004. Quantifying Social Vulnerability: A Methodology for Identifying Those at Risk to Natural Hazards. Canberra, Australia: Geoscience Australia.Google Scholar

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (4): 532–550.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fan, Y. X., Y. Luo, and Q. S. Chen. 2001. “Establishment of Weight about Vulnerability Indexes of a Hazard Bearing Body.” Journal of Catastrophology 16 (1): 85–87.Google Scholar

  • Flanagan, B. E., E. W. Gregory, E. J. Hallisey, J. L. Heitgerd, and B. Lewis. 2011. “A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management.” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 8 (1): Article 3.Google Scholar

  • Fothergill, A. 1996. “Gender, Risk, and Disaster.” International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 14: 33–56.Google Scholar

  • Fothergill, A., E. G. Maestas, and J. D. Darlington. 1999. “Race, Ethnicity and Disasters in the United States: A Review of the Literature.” Disasters 23 (2): 156–173.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hagenlocher, M., D. Hölbling, S. Kienberger, S. Vanhuysse, and P. Zeil. 2015. “Spatial Assessment of Social Vulnerability in the Context of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War in Battambang Province, Cambodia.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 15: 148–161.Google Scholar

  • Heinz Center for Science Economics and the Environment. The Hidden Costs of Coastal Hazards: Implications for Risk Assessment and Mitigation Covello, CA: Island Press 2000.Google Scholar

  • Hewitt, K. 1983. Interpretations of Calamity from the Viewpoint of Human Ecology. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

  • Hewitt, K. 1997. Regions of Risk: A Geographical Introduction to Disasters. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar

  • Huang, J., Y. Liu, and L. Ma. 2011. “Assessment of Regional Vulnerability to Natural Hazards in China using a DEA Model.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 2 (2): 41–48.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ishizaka, A., and A. Labib. 2009. “Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice: Benefits and Limitations.” OR Insight 22 (4): 201–220.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ishizaka, A., and A. Labib. 2011. “Review of the Main Developments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process.” Expert Systems with Applications 38 (11): 14336–14345.Google Scholar

  • Jaskowski, P., S. Biruk, and R. Bucon. 2010. “Assessing Contractor Selection Criteria Weights with Fuzzy AHP Method Application in Group Decision Environment.” Automation in Construction 19 (2): 120–126.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Junior, F. R. L., L. Osiro, and L. C. R. Carpinetti. 2014. “A Comparison between Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS Methods to Supplier Selection.” Applied Soft Computing 21 (5): 194–209.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kahraman, C., T. Ertay, and G. Büyüközkan. 2006. “A Fuzzy Optimization Model for QDF Planning Process using Analytic Network Approach.” European Journal of Operational Research 171 (2): 390–411.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kapucu, N., and V. Garayev. 2011. “Collaborative Decision-Making in Emergency and Crisis Management.” International Journal of Public Administration 34 (6): 366–375.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kaufmann, A., and M. M. Gupta. 2012. Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic: Theory and Applications. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar

  • Khunwishit, S., and D. A. McEntire. 2012. “Testing Social Vulnerability Theory: A Quantitative Study of Hurricane Katrina’s Perceived Impact on Residents Living in FEMA Designated Disaster Areas.” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 9 (1): Article 13.Google Scholar

  • Laarhoven, P. J. M. V., and W. Pedrycz. 1983. “A Fuzzy Extension of Saaty’s Priority Theory.” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 11 (1–3): 199–227.Google Scholar

  • Lai, T. 1991. “A Brief Analysis on Ankang 83.8 Flood and Flood Control Work.” Journal of Catastrophe 3: 27–32.Google Scholar

  • Lai, V. S., K. W. Bo, and W. Cheung. 2002. “Group Decision Making in a Multiple Criteria Environment: A Case using the AHP in Software Selection.” European Journal of Operational Research 137 (1): 134–144.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, A. R. 1995. Application of Modified Fuzzy AHP Method to Analyze Bolting Sequence of Structural Joints. UMI Dissertation Service, Bell & Howell Company.Google Scholar

  • Liu, H. C., L. Liu, N. Liu, and L. X. Mao. 2012. “Risk Evaluation in Failure Mode and Effects Analysis with Extended VIKOR Method under Fuzzy Environment.” Expert Systems with Applications 39 (17): 12926–12934.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Lu, X. 2009. “Hydrological Characteristics in Ankang City.” Journal of Water Resources & Water Engineering 20 (4): 154–157.Google Scholar

  • Mikhailov, L. 2003. “Deriving Priorities from Fuzzy Pairwise Comparison Judgments.” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 134 (3): 365–385.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mileti, D. 1999. Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.Google Scholar

  • Mon, D. L., C. H. Cheng, and J. C. Lin. 1994. “Evaluating Weapon System using Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Based on Entropy Weight.” Fuzzy Sets and Systems 62 (2): 127–134.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Morrow, B. H. 1999. “Identifying and Mapping Community Vulnerability.” Disasters 23 (1): 1–18.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mosadeghi, R., J. Warnken, R. Tomlinson, and H. Mirfenderesk. 2015. “Comparison of Fuzzy-AHP and AHP in a Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model for Urban Land-Use Planning.” Computers Environment & Urban Systems 49: 54–65.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ngo, E. B. 2001. “When Disasters and Age Collide: Reviewing Vulnerability of the Elderly.” Natural Hazards Review 2 (2): 80–89.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Opricovic, S., and G. H. Tzeng. 2004. “Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS.” European Journal of Operational Research 156 (2): 445–455.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Pedrycz, W. 1994. “Why Triangular Membership Functions?” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 64 (1): 21–30.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Redwood-Campbell, L., and J. Abrahams. 2011. “Primary Health Care and Disasters-the Current State of the Literature: What we Know, Gaps and Next Steps.” Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 26 (3): 184.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ren, Z., J. Dias, and W. Zhang. 2016. “Lessons and Challenges of Disaster Relief Work in Rural China.” Journal of Humanistic Psychology. DOI: .CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ribeiro, R. A. 1996. “Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: A Review and New Preference Elicitation Techniques.” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 78 (2): 155–181.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rostad, B., D. J. H. Deeg, and B. Schei. 2009. “Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health in Older Women.” European Journal of Ageing 6 (1): 39–47.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rufat, S., E. Tate, C. G. Burton, and A. S. Maroof. 2015. “Social Vulnerability to Floods: Review of Case Studies and Implications for Measurement.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 14: 470–486.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rygel, L., D. O’sullivan, and B. Yarnal. 2006. “A Method for Constructing a Social Vulnerability Index: An Application to Hurricane Storm Surges in a Developed Country.” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 11 (3): 741–764.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Saaty, T. L. 1977. “A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures.” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15 (3): 234–281.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Saaty, T. L. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

  • Saaty, T. L. 1996. The Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications.Google Scholar

  • Sakawa, M., and K. Kato. 2015. “A Consensus Model for Group Decision-Making Problems with Subjective Linguistic Preference Relations.” Fuzzy Sets & Systems 97 (1): 19–31.Google Scholar

  • Sanders, S., S. L. Boy, and Y. D. Bowie. 2004. “Lessons Learned on Forced Relocation of Older Adults: The Impact of Hurricane Andrew on Health, Mental Health, and Social Support of Public Housing Residents.” Journal of Gerontological Social Work 40 (4): 23–35.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schmidlin, T. W., B. O. Hammer, Y. Ono, and P. S. King. 2009. “Tornado Shelter-Seeking Behavior and Tornado Shelter Options among Mobile Home Residents in the United States.” Natural Hazards 48 (2): 191–201.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Skibniewski, M. J., and L. C. Chao. 1992. “Evaluation of Advanced Construction Technology with AHP Method.” Journal of Construction Engineering & Management 118 (3): 577–593.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Smit, B., and J. Wandel. 2006. “Adaptation, Adaptive Capacity and Vulnerability.” Global Environmental Change 16 (3): 282–292.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tate, E. 2012a. “Social Vulnerability Indices: A Comparative Assessment using Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis. Natural Hazards 63 (2): 325–347.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tate, E. 2012b. “Uncertainty Analysis for a Social Vulnerability Index.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 (3): 526–543.Google Scholar

  • Wei, Y. M., Y. Fan, C. Lu, and H. T. Tsai. 2004. “The Assessment of Vulnerability to Natural Disasters in China by using the DEA Method.” Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24 (4): 427–439.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Wisner, B., and J. Uitto. 2009. “Life on the Edge: Urban Social Vulnerability and Decentralized, Citizen-Based Disaster Risk Reduction in Four Large Cities of the Pacific Rim,” in Facing Global Environmental Change, edited by Hans Günter Brauch, Úrsula Oswald Spring, Czeslaw Mesjasz, John Grin, Navnita Chadha Behera, Pál Dunay, Béchir Chourou, Patricia Kameri-Mbote, P. H. Liotta, Heinz Krummenacher, and Jörn Birkmann, 215–231. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

  • Wisner, B., P. Blaikie, T. Cannon, and I. Davis. 2004. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Wood, N. J., C. G. Burton, and S. L. Cutter. 2010. “Community Variations in Social Vulnerability to Cascadia-Related Tsunamis in the US Pacific Northwest.” Natural Hazards 52 (2): 369–389.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Yen, K. K., S. Ghoshray, and G. Roig. 1999. “A Linear Regression Model using Triangular Fuzzy Number Coefficients.” Fuzzy sets and Systems 106 (2): 167–177.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Zadeh, L. A. 1965. “Fuzzy Set.” Information and Control 8 (3): 338–353.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Zahran, S., S. D. Brody, W. G. Peacock, A. Vedlitz, and H. Grover. 2008. “Social Vulnerability and the Natural and Built Environment: A Model of Flood Casualties in Texas.” Disasters 32 (4): 537–560.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Zebardast, E. 2013. “Constructing a Social Vulnerability Index to Earthquake Hazards using a Hybrid Factor Analysis and Analytic Network Process (F’ANP) Model.” Natural Hazards 65 (3): 1331–1359.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-08-17


National Social Science Fund of China, Grant Number: 16BZZ052.

Citation Information: Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 20160037, ISSN (Online) 1547-7355, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2016-0037.

Export Citation

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in