Inadequate infrastructural networks can be detrimental to society if transport between locations becomes hindered or delayed, especially due to natural hazards which are difficult to control. Thus determining natural hazard susceptible areas and incorporating them in the initial planning process, may reduce infrastructural damages in the long run. The objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of expert judgments for assessing natural hazard susceptibility through a spatial multi-criteria analysis approach using hydrological, geological, and land use factors. To utilize spatial multi-criteria analysis for decision support, an analytic hierarchy process was adopted where expert judgments were evaluated individually and in an aggregated manner. The estimates of susceptible areas were then compared with the methods weighted linear combination using equal weights and factor interaction method. Results showed that inundation received the highest susceptibility. Using expert judgment showed to perform almost the same as equal weighting where the difference in susceptibility between the two for inundation was around 4%. The results also showed that downscaling could negatively affect the susceptibility assessment and be highly misleading. Susceptibility assessment through spatial multi-criteria analysis is useful for decision support in early road planning despite its limitation to the selection and use of decision rules and criteria. A natural hazard spatial multi-criteria analysis could be used to indicate areas where more investigations need to be undertaken from a natural hazard point of view, and to identify areas thought to have higher susceptibility along existing roads where mitigation measures could be targeted after in-situ investigations.
Keywords: Analytic Hierarchy Process; Decision support; Expert judgment; SMCA; Transportation planning.