Table 10 Evaluation factor weights for AHP, EWM and coupling model.
From: Risk assessment of land subsidence in Shanghai municipality based on AHP and EWM
Indicators | AHP | EWM | Combination weight |
|---|---|---|---|
Elevation | 0.0987 | 0.0627 | 0.0743 |
Land subsidence rate | 0.1088 | 0.0618 | 0.0804 |
GW extraction intensity | 0.1595 | 0.0289 | 0.1223 |
Population density | 0.0595 | 0.0724 | 0.0584 |
GDP per unit area | 0.0700 | 0.1163 | 0.0867 |
Road network density | 0.0482 | 0.0569 | 0.0464 |
River network density | 0.0361 | 0.0195 | 0.0265 |
Building density | 0.0722 | 0.1153 | 0.0865 |
Proportion of vulnerable population | 0.0765 | 0.0477 | 0.0574 |
Land use type | 0.0989 | 0.0244 | 0.0738 |
Distance from river | 0.0281 | 0.0707 | 0.0513 |
Subway density | 0.0455 | 0.1017 | 0.0739 |
Public budget | 0.0256 | 0.0766 | 0.0560 |
Institutional capabilit | 0.0306 | 0.0610 | 0.0446 |
Educational level | 0.0418 | 0.0841 | 0.0614 |
