Utilizing the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) for Spatial Development Prioritization in Hama Region
الملخص
This study employs the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), a multi-criteria decision-making methodology, to identify the most suitable District for initiating spatial development in Hama Region, prioritizing district with the most urgent developmental needs. The research methodology involved a two-phase expert consultation process. In the first phase, a panel of 10 experts participated in a structured questionnaire designed to determine the most influential criteria in the selection process. In the second phase, the same experts applied AHP to assign weights to these criteria and evaluate the target districts accordingly.
The analysis, conducted using Super Decisions software, revealed that economic conditions were the most critical factor, receiving the highest weight (33%), followed by infrastructure availability (26%). The criteria of economic development potential and population density ranked next, with respective weights of 21% and 13%, while environmental conditions had the least influence, with a weight of 6%. Based on the assigned weights, Harbanafsah emerged as the most pressing priority for spatial development, making it the optimal starting point for intervention in Hama Region.
Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis was conducted to examine the impact of changes in criteria weights on the final ranking. The results indicated that modifying the weights of infrastructure availability and environmental conditions would make the Hama Governorate Center the most suitable area for development. These findings underscore the importance of criteria weighting in spatial decision-making and highlight the necessity of a flexible and adaptive approach in regional planning efforts.
References
2. Kosmacheva, N. M., & Smirnov, D. Yu. (2024). An Integrated Approach to Assessing the Factors Influencing the Balanced Development of the Region. Теория и Практика Общественного Развития, 11, 147–153.
3. Mishenin, Y., & Yarova, I. (2023). Essential and substantive features of balanced spatial development of rural areas: national and global aspects. Balanced Nature Using, 2, 27–34.
4. Mao, D., Zhang, J., Lu, H., & Guo, R. (2024). Assessment and analysis of the balance between economic development and ecological environment protection and its implementation strategy derived from spatial planning—Take three heterogeneous and representative provinces in China as an example. Heliyon, 10(3).
5. Shaikh, Z. P. (2024). Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) in Organizations. Advances in Computational Intelligence and Robotics Book Series, 151–180.
6. Wang, Z., Nabavi, S. R., & Rangaiah, G. P. (2024). Multi-Criteria Decision Making in Chemical and Process Engineering: Methods, Progress, and Potential. Processes, 12(11), 2532.
7. Multi-criteria analysis of urbanized area development concepts. (2023). Mokslas - Lietuvos Ateitis, 15(0), 1–10.
8. Rinner, C. (2024). Spatial Dimensions of Multi-Criteria Analysis. https://doi.org/10.32920/27174942.v1
9. Ünal, M., & Alptekin, G. I. (2023). Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making for Smart City Evaluation and Ranking. Kent Akademisi, 16(4), 2538-2552.
10. Aşılıoğlu, F., & Çay, R. D. (2023). A dual spatial analysis method based on recreation opportunity spectrum and analytical hierarchy process for outdoor recreation site suitability. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 44, 100703.
11. Merakchi, A., Alkama, D., & Zaouia, K. (2024). Assessment of the spatial appropriateness of the future urbanization of the city of (ain beida, algeria) using geographic information systems, the analytical hierarchy process, and the delphi method. International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Social Science, 2(42).
12. A Systematic Review of Analytic Hierarchy Process Applications to Solve Transportation Problems: From 2003 to 2022. (2023). IEEE Access, 11, 11973–11990.
13. Abdullah, M. M., & Asmael, N. M. (2023). Analytic hierarchy process for evaluation of transportation alternatives on the Karkh side of Baghdad. Journal of Engineering and Sustainable Development, 27(6), 771-782.
14. Bouramdane, A. A. (2024). Enhancing disaster management in smart cities through MCDM-AHP analysis amid 21st century challenges. Information System and Smart City, 3(1).
15. Mushwani, H., Ahmadzai, M. R., Ullah, H., Baheer, M. S., & Peroz, S. (2024). A comprehensive AHP numerical module for assessing resilience of Kabul City to flood hazards. Urban Climate, 55, 101939.
16. Bugingo, E., & Ndimubenshi, E. L. (2025). Application of AHP in Decision-Making: Case Studies. The Art of Decision Making-Applying AHP in Practice: Applying AHP in Practice, 121.
17. Bregvadze, A., & Davitaia, B. (2024). Application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process Method in Financing the Regional Development Problem on the Example of a Customer Company. Ekonomika, 106(11–12), 48–54.
18. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 1(1), 83-98.
19. Macharis, C., Springael, J., De Brucker, K., & Verbeke, A. (2004). PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis.: Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP. European journal of operational research, 153(2), 307-317.
