See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263510180

Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge Using a GIS-Based

Decision Support System in Jazan Region-Saudi Arabia

Article in Water Resources Management · August 2014

DOI: 10.1007/s11269-014-0681-4

CITATIONS READS

74 1,762

3 authors:

Shereif Mahmoud Prof Alazba

University of Alberta King Saud University
34 PUBLICATIONS 1,233 CITATIONS 205 PUBLICATIONS 4,017 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Md T Amin
King Saud University
58 PUBLICATIONS 1,867 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Prof Alazba on 21 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Water Resour Manage (2014) 28:3319–3340
DOI 10.1007/s11269-014-0681-4

Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater

Recharge Using a GIS-Based Decision Support System
in Jazan Region-Saudi Arabia

Shereif H. Mahmoud & A. A. Alazba & Amin M. T

Received: 7 November 2013 / Accepted: 15 May 2014 /

Published online: 1 June 2014
# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract In arid and semi-arid environments, the amount of recharge received by aquifers is
far more critical to the sustainable use of water than it is in humid regions. Groundwater
recharge (GWR) is critical to maintain the abundance of groundwater. In the present study,
suitable areas for GWR in Jazan region have been identified by using a GIS-based decision
support system (DSS). The DSS was implemented to obtain suitability maps and to evaluate
the existing GWR in the study area. The DSS inputs comprised maps of rainfall surplus, slope,
potential runoff coefficient, land cover/use and soil texture. The spatial extents of GWR
suitability areas were identified by a hierarchical process analysis that considered five layers.
The model generated a GWR map with four categories of suitability: excellent, good, moderate
and poor and unsuitable. The spatial distribution of these categories showed that 50.5 and 31 %
of the study area was classified as excellent and good for GWR, respectively, while 16 and
2.5 % of the area were classified as moderate and poor and unsuitable, respectively. Most of
the areas with excellent to good suitability have slopes of between 4 and 8 % and are
intensively cultivated areas. The major soil type in the excellent to good areas is loamy sand,
followed by silt loam, and the rainfall in these areas ranges from 100 to 270 mm. The locations
of existing GWR dams were compared with the locations indicated on the generated suitability
map using the proximity analysis tool in ArcGIS 10.1. Most (75 %) of the existing GWR
structures that were categorised as successful were within the excellent and good areas,
followed by moderately suitable (25 %).

Keywords Groundwater recharge (GWR) . Geographic information system (GIS) . Analytical

hierarchy process (AHP) . Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) . Decision support system (DSS)

1 Introduction

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is one of the hottest and driest subtropical desert countries in the
world. With an average of 112 mm of precipitation per annum, much of the country falls
within the standard definition of a desert (Shereif 2014a). Saudi Arabia receives an estimated

S. H. Mahmoud (*) : A. A. Alazba : A. M. T

Alamoudi Water Research Chair, King Saud University, PO Box: 2460, 11451 Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
e-mail: [email protected]
3320 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

158.47 billion m3 of rainwater annually (Al-Rashed and Sherif 2000), yet limited amounts of
this water recharge the groundwater resources. The problem is compounded by the high
evaporation rate and the lack of rainwater harvesting (RWH) practices in this country, which
makes it difficult to directly harvest and use the surface water runoff (Al-Rashed and Sherif
2000). The total surface runoff generated from rainfall is estimated as 3.21 billion m3 yr−1
(Khouri and Deroubi 1990). The exploitation of subsurface water from deep aquifers is also
depleting resources (Siebert et al. 2010) that have taken decades or centuries to accumulate,
and on which the current annual rainfall has no immediate effect.
Water limitations are particularly severe in Saudi Arabia, where agriculture is almost
completely dependent on groundwater (Saud et al. 2013), which is difficult and expensive to
obtain. Water for both agricultural and domestic purposes has to be obtained by desalination,
which is a cost-intensive process. Owing to such limitations in water resources and to increase
the potential of cultivated areas, it is necessary to develop an alternative supplementary water
source. Groundwater is the major natural source for the water supply system in Saudi Arabia
(Dabbagh and Abderrahman 1997). Groundwater from dug wells has long been the main source
of water for people, and over-exploitation through excessive abstraction of groundwater
exceeds the replenishment capacity. These techniques have not been duly considered due to a
lack of understanding of their importance. In water resource planning, groundwater is attracting
increased attention due to the shortage of high-quality subsurface water and the increasing need
for water for domestic, agricultural and industrial uses. It has become crucial not only to target
potential groundwater zones but also to monitor and conserve this important resource. More-
over, in targeting potential groundwater zones, it is also important to identify suitable sites for
artificial recharge. When the natural recharge rate cannot meet the demand for water, the
balance is disturbed, hence there are calls for artificial recharge throughout the country.
Artificial recharge is the process of augmenting the natural movement of surface water into
underground formations using artificial methods. Replenishment of groundwater through
artificial recharge has been carried out in various parts of the world for the past six decades
(Babcock and Cusing 1942; Beeby-Thompson 1950; Buchen 1955; Todd 1959; Asano 1985).
Gandhi and Masoom (1990) described the groundwater augmentation program in the
Aurangabad district, where a series of surface dams across rivulets and terracing were built
and the water table level increased from 0.2 to 1 m in the wells in the vicinity of the project.
Nilkalja and Masoom (1990) reported on the effect of subsurface dams in Jalna district, where
dams were constructed across second- and third-order streams, resulting in a substantial
increase in the water table levels.
Most studies have focused on the selection of sites for aquifer recharge (Saraf and
Choudhury 1998; Anbazhagan et al. 2005; Ravi Shankar and Mohan 2005) using geographical
information system (GIS) techniques. The use of integrated remote sensing (RS) and GIS
techniques in artificial recharge studies only began very recently (Chowdhury et al. 2010).
A number of attempts to delineate potential groundwater zones using remote sensing (RS)
data have been made by Saraf and Choudhury (1998), Murthy (2000), Jaiswal et al. (2003),
Ghayoumian et al. (2005), Anbazhagan et al. (2005), Ravi Shankar and Mohan (2005), Sener
et al. (2005), Kumar et al. (2007, 2008), Chowdhury et al. (2009), Chenini et al. (2010), Dar
et al. (2011), Nag and Ghosh (2012), (Dhakate et al. 2013), (Agarwal et al. 2013), Deepika
et al. (2013) and Shereif (2014a).
Chowdhury et al. (2010) proposed a methodology to delineate artificial recharge zones and
to identify favourable artificial recharge sites using integrated RS, GIS and multi-criteria
decision-making (MCDM) techniques for augmenting groundwater resources in the West
Medinipur district of West Bengal, India. The thematic layers considered in their study were
geomorphology, geology, drainage density, slope and aquifer transmissivity, which were
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3321

prepared using IRS-1D imagery and conventional data. Different themes and their corresponding
features were assigned proper weights based on their relative contribution to groundwater
recharge in the area, and normalised weights were computed using Saaty’s analytic hierarchy
process (AHP). The artificial recharge map thus obtained divided the study area into three zones,
‘suitable,’ ‘moderately suitable’ and ‘unsuitable’ according to their suitability for artificial
recharge. Radulovic et al. (2012) listed the key factors to be considered when assessing
recharge of highly karstified terrains as climate, topography, vegetation, soil and geology.
Rahman et al. (2012) developed a new spatial multi-criteria decision analysis software tool
for selecting suitable sites for managed aquifer recharge systems, based on the combination of
existing multi-criteria evaluation methods with modern decision analysis techniques. The
thematic layers considered in this study were land use, slope, infiltration rate, GW pollution
sources, groundwater depth and residence time.
Sargaonkar et al. (2011) identified potential sites for locating groundwater recharge
structures based on land use, soil, topography and rainfall runoff modelling. Soares et al.
(2012) presented a methodological approach for mapping potential infiltration areas, taking
into account thematic maps (geology, pedology, geomorphology and land use/land cover) and
the spatial distribution of precipitation. The results showed that only around 7 % of the
watershed area was highly suitable for infiltration, and these areas comprised smooth and
gentle hills, fluvial tertiary sediments and yellow oxisols. A study conducted by Huang et al.
(2013) to assess groundwater recharge and potential exploitation zones in the central division
of the mountain areas of Taiwan identified the contributing factors as lithology, land cover/land
use, drainage, slope and lineaments.
Recently, the integration of runoff modelling, remote sensing and GIS has gained signif-
icance in targeting suitable sites for water recharging/harvesting structures (Padmavathy et al.
1993; El-Awar et al. 2000; Ravishankar and Mohan 2005; De Winnaar et al. 2007; Shereif
2014a, 2014b). The suitability of GWR structures such as check dams, contour bonding,
recharge pits and wells and contour trenching depends on various factors, which can be
integrated using GIS techniques (Novaline et al. 1993).
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a multi-criteria decision-making approach intro-
duced by Saaty (1977, 1994). AHP is a GIS-based MCDM that combines and transforms
spatial data (input) into a decision (output). The procedures include the use of geographical
data, the decision maker’s preferences and manipulation of the data and preferences according
to specified decision rules, referred to as factors and constraints.
According to Malczewski (2004), the considerations that are of critical importance in
decision-making are:.

1. GIS capabilities of data acquisition, storage, retrieval, manipulation and analysis; and
2. Ability of the MCDM in combining the geographical data analysis and the decision
maker’s preferences into a uni-dimensional value for each alternative decision.

As a key decision-making tool, AHP was used in this study to obtain appropriate solutions
to the suitability assessment for RWH. Saaty (1990) noted that the process includes the
structuring of factors that are selected in a hierarchy, starting from the overall aim to the
criteria, sub-criteria and alternatives. Saaty (2008) outlined four key steps for using AHP to
decide between alternatives, as follows:.

(1) define the issue to be considered;

(2) identify the goal, which is the criterion that the other elements will depend on and which
should be at the top of the decision-making tree;
3322 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

(3) develop a pair-wise comparison matrix; and

(4) weight each element according to the priorities obtained from the comparison matrix,
which can then be used as the basis for deciding between the alternatives at the bottom of
the hierarchy.

This paper presents a methodology based on a decision support system (DSS) that uses
remote sensing and field survey data combined with GIS to identify suitable GWR areas in
Jazan region-Saudi Arabia.

2 Method

This was a multidisciplinary study involving a field survey and modelling. A variety
of techniques such GIS, RS and aerial image interpretation were used. Jazan province,
which lies in the western part of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, was selected as the
study area. Information on past and recent GWR structures in Jazan was obtained
from a literature review, a GPS field survey and from farmers’ responses to a semi-
structured interview questionnaire.

2.1 The Study Area

Jazan Region (16°53’21”N 42°33’40”E) was selected as the target region (Fig. 1)
because of the considerable divergence in its topography and climate. It is the smallest
region of Saudi Arabia. It stretches some 300 km along the southern Red Sea coast, just
north of Yemen. It covers an area of 11,671 km2. The region includes over 100 islands in
the Red Sea. The Farasan Islands, Saudi Arabia’s first conservation protected area, are
home to the endangered Arabian gazelle and, in winter, migratory birds from Europe.
Jazan has a hot desert climate with an average annual temperature of 30 °C (86 °F). The
weather varies from extremely hot in its long summers to hot in its short winters. Rainfall
ranges between 70 and 270 mm/year.
Because the economy of the region is agro-based, the significance of water availability and
its management is very important (Chenini et al. 2010), in order to create sufficient irrigation
facilities, attention needs to be focused on groundwater, which is the only viable source of
water in such arid area.

2.2 Multi-criteria Evaluation Framework and Geographical Information Management

The identification of suitable areas for GWR is a multi-objective and multi-criteria problem.
The major steps in generating the maps in this study were as follows:.

& Selection of criteria

& Assessment of the suitability levels of criteria for GWR
& Assignment of weights to these criteria
& Collection of spatial data for the criteria through various sources, including a GPS survey
to supplement and generate maps using GIS tools
& Development of a GIS-based suitability model, which combines maps through a Spatial
Multi Criteria Evaluation process (SMCE) process
& Generation of suitability maps
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3323

Fig. 1 A location map of the study area

We selected the following five criteria for identifying potential sites for GWR:

A. Soil map
B. Land cover and land use (derived from available RS data)
3324 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Fig. 2 The work flow chart

Fig. 3 A conceptual framework of potential GWR mapping

Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3325

Table 1 Suitability levels for different factors for identifying potential sites for GWR

Suitability 5 4 3 2 1
values

Soil texture Coarse Medium and Fine and medium Medium Fine
coarse
Rainfall surplus Large surplus Small surplus Medium deficit Large deficit Very large
deficit
Slope (%) 4–8 8–12 0–4 12–16 >16
Land cover Intensively Moderately Forest, exposed Mountain Water body,
cultivated cultivated surface urban areas
PRC 0.7–1 0.5–0.7 0.4–0.5 0.3–0.4 0–0.3

C. Slope (i.e., topography)

D. Runoff coefficient
E. Rainfall surplus precipitation

The criteria and their application for mapping the GWR potential in the region are
presented in Figs. 2 and 3. Because of the different scales on which the criteria were
measured, the values contained in the criterion maps had to be converted into
comparable units for SMCE. Therefore, the criteria maps were re-classed into four
comparable units or suitability classes: 5 (excellent), 4 (good), 3 (moderate), 2 and 1
(poor and unsuitable). The suitability classes were then used as the basis for gener-
ating the criteria map.

2.3 Assessment of suitability level for GWR criteria

Areas with a large rainfall surplus are ranked as highly suitable because the surplus
ensures the availability of rainwater for GWR. A GWR structure is generally more
appropriate in areas with a rather flatter slope; however, a slight slope is needed for
better harvesting of the runoff. Therefore, areas with slopes ranging from 4 to 8 % are
given higher suitability ratings. A runoff coefficient of >0.5 indicates a potential area for
RWH that can be used for GWR. Mkiramwinyi (2006) provided a detailed analysis of the
suitability rankings. The values for each suitability category were scaled from 1 to 9 and
were based on the criteria proposed by Diamond and Parteno (2004). The method has
been found to be robust and reliable (Diamond and Parteno 2004). The suitability
rankings for soil texture, rainfall surplus, slope, land cover and runoff coefficient are
shown in Tables 1.

Table 2 Random Indices (RI) for

n=1, 2… 15 (Saaty 1980) n RI n RI n RI

1 0.00 6 1.24 11 1.51

2 0.00 7 1.32 12 1.48
3 0.58 8 1.41 13 1.56
4 0.90 9 1.45 14 1.57
5 1.01 10 1.49 15 1.59
3326 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Table 3 The pairwise comparison matrix for GWR areas

Texture Land cover Slope Rainfall surplus Runoff

Texture 1 7 4 3 2
Land cover 1/7 1 3 2 1
Slope 1/4 1/2 3 1 1/2
Rainfall surplus 1/3 1/5 1/2 1/4 1/7
Runoff 1/2 1/3 1 1/3 1/4

2.4 Assignment of Weights to These Criteria

The criteria were assigned weights by applying the pair-wise ranking and rank sum methods.
The final weight calculation requires the computation of the principal eigenvector of the pair-
wise comparison matrix to produce a best-fit set of weights. The WEIGHT module in the
IDRISI software was used for this calculation. The weighting procedure is based on AHP. The
relative importance of the pair-wise combinations of the factors was judged using the
following 9-point rating scale:

1/9 1/7 1/5 1/3 1 3 5 7 9

extremely very strongly strongly moderately equally moderately strongly very strongly extremely
Less important More important

The expected value method was used to calculate the weight, WK, for criterion k according
to Eq. (1) (Janssen and Van Herwijnen 1994):
Xnþ1−K 1
Wk ¼ ð1Þ
i¼1 nðn þ 1−iÞ

where n=the number of criteria and k=criterion.

The rank sum method was used to calculate the weight, WK, for criterion k according to Eq. (2):
n þ 1−K
W K ¼ Xn ð2Þ
i¼1
ðn þ 1−iÞ

where n=the number of criteria and k=criterion.

The accuracy of the pairwise comparisons was assessed by calculating the consistency index
(CI). This index determines the inconsistencies in the pair-wise judgments and is a measure of
departure from consistency based on the comparison matrices. It is expressed as Eq (3)
CI ¼ ðλ−nÞ=ðn−1Þ ð3Þ
where λ is the average value of the consistency vector and n is the number of columns in the
matrix (Garfì et al. 2009; Saaty 1990; Eq (4) Vahidnia et al. 2008). The consistency ratio (CR)
was then calculated as follows:
CR ¼ CI=RI ð4Þ

where RI is the random index, which depends on the number of elements being compared (Garfì
et al. 2009). Table 2 presents the RIs of the matrices in the order 1–15, as derived by Saaty (1980).
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3327

The pairwise rating procedure has several advantages. First, the ratings are independent of any
specific measurement scale. Second, the procedure, by its very nature, encourages discussion,
leading to a consensus on the weights to be used. In addition, the criteria that are omitted from
initial deliberations are quickly uncovered through the discussions that accompany this procedure.
Experience has shown, however, that while it is not difficult to come up with a set of ratings by this
means, the ratings are not always consistent. Thus, the technique used for developing weights from
these ratings also needs to be sensitive to the problems of inconsistency and error. To provide a
systematic procedure for comparison, a pairwise comparison matrix was created by setting out one
row and one column for each factor in the problem (Table 3). The rating was then calculated for each
cell in the matrix. Because the matrix is symmetrical, the ratings are provided for half of the matrix
and then inferred for the other half.
The consistency ratio of the matrix, which shows the degree of consistency achieved when
comparing the criteria or the probability that the matrix rating was randomly generated, was
0.02, which indicates acceptable consistency (Saaty 1977).

3 Results and Discussion

3.1 Thematic Maps

Details of thematic maps relevant for identification of potential sites for GWR are given in the
following subsections.

Fig. 4 A soil texture map of the study area

3328 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

3.1.1 Soil map

A soil map was developed for the study area under the guidance of soil experts, using GPS
data to identify the soil texture in the region. The GPS points of the soil texture data for the
area covered by the field survey were imported into ArcGIS to develop a soil texture map
(Fig. 4). Three soil classes – loamy sand, silt loam and loam– were identified in the study
region. Loamy sand, which has a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted, and is
classified as moderately to well-drained soil with moderately fine to moderately coarse
textures. Silty loam and loam have low infiltration rates.

3.1.2 Land Cover and Land use (Derived from Available RS Data)

Landsat 5/7 TM/ETM images were obtained for 2000 from the King Abdul-Aziz City for Science
and Technology (KACST). These images were incorporated with data collected from the specified
region, and were ultimately used for categorising land use and land cover (LULC). ERDAS Imagine
software 2013 was used to mosaic the collected satellite images. The unsupervised classification tool
in Iso Cluster and the maximum likelihood classification functions in ArcGIS Spatial Analyst were
used for the unsupervised classification. Training samples collected during a field survey were used
to create spectral signatures (i.e., reflectance values) for the supervised classification to identify what
the clusters represented (e.g., water, bare earth, dry soil) . The LULC map shows four main classes:
cropland, sparsely vegetated land, forest and shrub land and bare soil (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 An LULC map for the study region

Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3329

3.1.3 Slope (Topography)

A digital elevation model (DEM) with 30-m resolution was obtained from the KACST and used to
generate the slope map for Jazan region. Sinks and flat areas were removed to maintain the
continuity of water flow to the catchment outlets (Fig. 6). GIS was used for DEM preparation by
filling the sink areas ready for the next step, as presented in Fig. (6). A slope map (Fig. 7) was
generated for the study area on the basis of the filled DEM of Jazan to identify potential GWR sites.

3.1.4 Potential Runoff Coefficient

The curve number is a hydrologic parameter used to describe storm water runoff potential for
drainage area, and it is a function of land use, soil type, and soil moisture. Shereif et al. (2014)
conducted a study to estimate the Potential Runoff Coefficient (PRC) using geographic
information system (GIS) based on the area’s hydrologic soil group (HSG), land use, and
slope for Al-Baha region- Saudi Arabia. Figure 8 describes the GIS-based estimation of PRC
by considering the area’s hydrologic soil group, land use, and slope.
In order to estimate PRC. the following reclassifications were made

1. The land cover map was reclassified into four main classes (forest, grass and shrub,
cropland, and bare soil), and these groups were assigned weights 1, 2, 3, and 4,
respectively (Fig. 9).

Fig. 6 Exploitation of the digital elevation model

3330 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Fig. 7 Slope map for identifying potential GWR sites

2. The Soil texture (type) map used to build an HSG map, and its three classes were assigned
weights 10, 20, and 30 (Fig. 10).

Soil map Remote sensing

DEM
data

Digitizing Geo - referencing Extraction of Slope

Digital image map
processing
Geo - referencing
Classification of
Generation of Land
slope map
cover
Classification of
Soil map for CN Classification of Classified Slope
Land cover map map

Potential Runoff
coefficient

Fig. 8 Conceptual Framework of Runoff coefficient Potential mapping (Shereif et.al, 2014)
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3331

Fig. 9 Reclassified soil hydrological group map

3. The slope map was reclassified into four classes, and these classes were assigned weights
from 100 to 400 (Fig. 11).

The above-mentioned three maps were combined into one map using GIS, and a new field
was added to the attribute table of the curve numbers. These PRC values for different land use,
soil types, and slopes are listed in Table 4. PRC for impervious surfaces (including open water
surface) was set to 1.
PRC is estimated using continuous slope on the basis of a simple linear relationship as
shown below Eq (5) (Liu and De Smedt 2004).
S
C ¼ C 0 þ ð1−C 0 Þ ð5Þ
S þ S0

Where C is the potential runoff coefficient for a surface slope S(%), and C0 is the potential
runoff coefficient for a near-zero slope corresponding to the values listed in the first row of
each land use class in Table 5. S0(%) is a slope constant for different land use and soil type
combinations and is calibrated using the data in The map of PRCs calculated from the slope,
soil type, and land use class combinations is shown in Fig. 12.
The PRC approaches C0 when the slope is very small and approaches 1 when the slope is
infinite. Its magnitude decreases with increasing slope. This observation confirms that the
runoff volume for a certain amount of rainfall is only slightly affected or unaffected by slope
beyond a critical value of the slope Shereif et al. (2014).
3332 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Fig. 10 Reclassified Landcover map

3.2 Rainfall Surplus

As the climatic data obtained from the metrological department, the Ministry of Agriculture
and the Ministry of Water and Electricity were insufficient for this study, we interpolated data
from the following sources:

3 Satellite images for monthly global precipitation from 1979 to 2009, obtained from the
World Data Center for Meteorology.
4 NASA Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) Monthly Global Precipitation data
from 1998 to 2010, obtained from the NASA GES Distributed Active Archive Center.

The rainfall surplus (P-ET) map was generacbvted by subtracting the long-term average
monthly evapotranspiration values of the precipitation for all meteorological stations for the
1950 to 2012 period. The annual rainfall surplus was calculated at each metrological station by
adding only the positive values of the difference (P-ET), and a map of the spatial distribution
of rainfall surplus (Fig. 13) generated by interpolating the previous data values using ArcGIS.

3.3 Developing of a GIS-Based Suitability Model

A suitability model was developed using the model builder function in ArcGIS 10.1. The
model generates suitability maps for GWR by integrating different input criteria maps using a
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3333

Fig. 11 Reclassified slope map

weighted overlay process that utilises both vector and raster databases. A weighted linear
combination is applied, in which a weight is applied to each criteria and the results are
summed to yield a suitability map using the WEIGHT module in the IDRISI software
(Table 6).

3.4 Integration of Thematic Layers

Suitable GWR sites were implemented in the ArcGIS model environment using the model
builder tool in ArcGIS 10.1. The spatial extents of the suitable GWR areas were identified
using MCE, based on AHP analysis and taking into account five layers. Different spatial
analysis tools were used in the model to solve spatial problems in the process of identifying
suitable areas. The identification process in this study can be considered a multi-objective and
multi-criteria problem.
The suitability model generated a suitability map for GWR with four suitability classes:
excellent, good, moderate and poor and unsuitable (Fig. 14). The spatial distribution of the
suitability map shows that the excellent and good areas for GWR are located in the north and
west of the study area, whereas most of the central part is rated as excellent and good, with
some moderate locations. The south and east have the same categories, dominated by
moderate, poor and unsuitable areas, with some good locations. As Table 7 shows, about
50.5 % and 31 % of the study area is classified as having excellent and good suitability for
GWR, respectively, while 16 % is moderately suitability and 2.5 % is poor and unsuitable.
3334 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Table 4 PRC for different land use, soil type, and slope (Liu and De Smedt 2004)

Land use Slope Sand Loamy Sandy Loam Silt Silt Sandy Clay Silty Sandy Silty Clay
Clay Clay

(%) Sand Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Clay Clay

Forest <0,5 0.03 0.07 0.1 0.13 0.17 0.2 0.23 0.27 0.3 0.33 0.37 0.4
0,5–5 0.07 0.11 0.14 0.17 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.37 0.41 0.44
5–10 0.13 0.17 0.2 0.23 0.27 0.3 0.33 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.5
>10 0.25 0.29 0.32 0.35 0.39 0.42 0.45 0.49 0.52 0.55 0.59 0.62
Grass <0,5 0.13 0.17 0.2 0.23 0.27 0.3 0.33 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.5
0,5–5 0.17 0.21 0.24 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.37 0.41 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54
5–10 0.23 0.27 0.3 0.33 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.5 0.53 0.57 0.6
>10 0.35 0.39 0.42 0.45 0.49 0.52 0.55 0.59 0.62 0.65 0.69 0.72
Crop <0,5 0.23 0.27 0.3 0.33 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.5 0.53 0.57 0.6
0,5–5 0.27 0.31 0.34 0.37 0.41 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54 0.57 0.61 0.64
5–10 0.33 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.5 0.53 0.57 0.6 0.63 0.67 0.7
>10 0.45 0.49 0.52 0.55 0.59 0.62 0.65 0.69 0.72 0.75 0.79 0.82
Bare <0,5 0.33 0.37 0.4 0.43 0.47 0.5 0.53 0.57 0.6 0.63 0.67 0.7
soil 0,5–5 0.37 0.41 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54 0.57 0.61 0.64 0.67 0.71 0.74
5–10 0.43 0.47 0.5 0.53 0.57 0.6 0.63 0.67 0.7 0.73 0.77 0.8
>10 0.55 0.59 0.62 0.65 0.69 0.72 0.75 0.79 0.82 0.85 0.89 0.92
IMP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

The results show that the excellent and good suitability areas are characterised by slopes
ranging from 4–8 %, are covered by loamy sand and have annual rainfall of more than
270 mm.
Remote sensing, GIS and AHP have been shown to be powerful for mapping potential
groundwater recharge sites, and are economical and time effective (Chowdhury et al. 2010).
The results obtained in this study agree with the findings obtained by Chowdhury et al. (2010).
In this study, the soil texture and runoff coefficient of the soil were the main constraints on the
potential site selection. The overall suitability map shows the relative rankings of the potential
sites generated by constraint mapping according to the importance criteria. The suitability
scores indicate the relative site-rankings for constructing an infiltration basin. The most
suitable areas are situated within agricultural areas that have high infiltration rates and very
gentle slopes (ranging from 4–8 %). This finding is in good agreement with that of Rahman

Table 5 Slope constant S0 for determining potential runoff coefficient (Liu and De Smedt 2004)

Sandy Silty

Land use Sand Loamy Sandy Loam Silt Silt Clay Clay Clay Sandy Silty Clay
Sand Loam Loam Loam Loam Loam Clay Clay

Forest 0.68 0.65 0.62 0.59 0.56 0.53 0.5 0.47 0.44 0.41 0.38 0.35
Grass 0.58 0.551 0.522 0.493 0.464 0.435 0.405 0.376 0.347 0.318 0.289 0.26
Crop 0.5 0.471 0.442 0.413 0.384 0.355 0.325 0.296 0.267 0.238 0.209 0.18
Bare soil 0.42 0.393 0.365 0.338 0.311 0.284 0.256 0.229 0.202 0.175 0.147 0.12
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3335

Fig. 12 Distribution of potential runoff coefficient

et al. (2012), who concluded that areas with 5 % slope allow high infiltration rates and are
suitable for aquifer recharge.
The main difference between the present study and previous studies (e.g. Chowdhury et al.
2010) is that the generated recharge zone map was divided into three different zones: suitable,
moderately suitable and unsuitable. The map shows that an average of 4,500 km2 (46 % of the
total area) falls under the ‘suitable’ zone; 4,200 km2 (43 %) falls under the ‘moderately
suitable’ groundwater recharge zone; and 1078 km2 (11 %) falls under the ‘unsuitable’ zone.
Another study, conducted by Rahman et al. (2012) show a distance of 8.5 km from the highly
suitable areas to the existing dam, which may incur extra water transportation costs. In
comparison, the suitability map for GWR generated in the present study shows that an average
of 5893.9 km2, 50.5 % of the total area, has excellent suitability for GWR, (3618.01 km2)
31 % lies in areas with good suitability for GWR,and (1868.37 km2) 16 % falls under the
‘moderately suitable’ groundwater recharge zone.
To verify the accuracy of the proposed method, the GWR dam locations were checked
against the constructed map. The verification was performed using the proximity analysis tool
implemented in the ArcGIS v. 10.1 software. The result shows that the existing GWR
structures that were categorised as successful are within the excellent and good areas (75 %
of the structures), followed by the moderately suitable areas (25 % of the structures). The
proposed method should be of great help to hydrologists and can be applied in arid and semi-
arid regions.
3336 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Fig. 13 The rainfall surplus map of the study area

4 Conclusion

This study presents a geographic information system (GIS) methodology based on a decision
support system that uses remote sensing data, field survey data and GIS to identify suitable
GWR areas. A set of thematic maps were derived from remote sensing data, including maps of
rainfall surplus, slope, potential runoff coefficient, land cover/use and soil texture.
The WEIGHT module in the Idrisi software was used for this calculation. The weighting
procedure in the software is based on the analytical hierarchy process. The first step involved
judging the relative importance of pairwise combinations of the relevant factors using a 9-point
rating scale. The consistency ratio of the matrix – which shows the degree of consistency
achieved in comparing the criteria, or the probability that the matrix rating was randomly

Table 6 Weight (Percentage of

Influence) No. Criteria Weight Weight %

1 Soil texture 0.426 42.6

2 Land cover/use 0.049 4.9
3 Slope 0.085 8.5
4 Rainfall surplus 0.178 17.8
5 Potential RC 0.262 26.2
Sum 1 100
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3337

Fig. 14 The GWR suitability map for the study area

generated – was 0.02, which is lower than the acceptable consistency value of 0.10 (Saaty
1977).
The processes involved in producing a GWR suitability map were implemented in a
suitability model developed in the ArcGIS model builder. The suitability model generated
suitability maps for GWR by integrating different input criteria maps using the weighted
overlay process, which utilised both vector and raster databases. A weight was applied to each
criteria and the results were summed to yield a suitability map using the WEIGHT module in
the Idrisi software.
The outcomes of this work could be applied to develop an effective groundwater manage-
ment program for the study area by setting up the GWR techniques at the most suitable
locations to ensure the sustainable use of scarce groundwater resources. The databases and the
results obtained can also be used to develop conceptual models for similar arid regions. The
validity of the multi-criteria analysis was verified based on the existing GWR structures in the

Table 7 Areas under different

suitability classes Suitability Area (Km2) Percentage of
total area

Excellent 5893.9 50.5

Good 3618.01 31
Moderate 1867.36 16
Poor and unsuitable 291.775 2.5
3338 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

study area. The validation results showed that the database and methodology used for
developing the suitability model, including the criteria for the suitability levels and the weights
for their relative importance, produced excellent results.

Acknowledgments I am grateful to the two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments, which have
substantially improved this manuscript.
This project was financially supported by King Saud University, Deanship of Scientific Research, College of
Food and Agricultural Sciences Research Centre.

References

Agarwal R, Garg PK, Garg RD (2013) Remote Sensing and GIS Based Approach for Identification of Artificial
Recharge Sites. Water Resour Manag 27(7):2671–2689
Al-Rashed MF, Sherif MM (2000) Water Resources in the GCC Countries: an Overview. Water Resour Manag
14(1):59–75
Anbazhagan S, Ramasamy SM, Das Gupta S (2005) Remote Sensing and GIS for Artificial Recharge Study,
Runoff Estimation and Planning in Ayyar Basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Env Geol 48:158–170
Asano T (ed) (1985) Artificial Recharge of Groundwater. Butterworth, Boston, p 767
Babcock HM, Cusing EM (1942) Recharge to Groundwater from Floods in a Typical Desert Wash, Pinal County,
Arizona. Trans Am Geophys Union 23:49–56
Beeby-Thompson A (1950) Recharging London’s Water Basin. Timer Review Industry, pp 20–25
Buchen S (1955) Artificial Replenishment of Aquifers. J Inst Water Eng 9:111–163
Chenini I, Mammou AB, El May M (2010) Groundwater Recharge Zone Mapping Using GIS-Based
Multi-Criteria Analysis: A Case Study in Central Tunisia (Maknassy Basin). Water Resour Manag
24(5):921–939
Chowdhury A, Jha MK, Chowdary VM, Mal BC (2009) Integrated Sensing and GIS-Based Approach for
Assessing Groundwater Potential in West Medinipur District, West Bengal, India. Int J Remote Sens 30(1):
231–250
Chowdhury A, Jha MK, Chowdary VM (2010) Delineation of Groundwater Recharge Zones and Identification
of Artificial Recharge Sites in West Medinipur District, West Bengal, Using RS, GIS, and MCDM
Techniques. Environ Earth Sci 59(6):1209–1222
Dabbagh AE, Abderrahman WA (1997) Management of groundwater resources under various irrigation water
use scenarios in Saudi Arabia. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 22 (1 C), 47–64.
Dar IA, Sankar K, Dar MA (2011) Deciphering Groundwater Potential Zones in Hard Rock Terrain Using
Geospatial Technology. Environ Monit Assess 173(1–4):597–610
De Winnaar G, Jewitt GPW, Horan M (2007) A GIS-Based Approach for Identifying Potential Runoff
Harvesting Sites in the Thukela River Basin, South Africa. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/
B/C 32(15):1058–1067
Deepika B, Avinash K, Jayappa KS (2013) Integration of Hydrological Factors and Demarcation of Groundwater
Prospect Zones: Insights from Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques. Environmental Earth Sciences 70(3):
1319–1338
Dhakate R, Rao VG, Raju BA, Mahesh J, Rao SM, Sankaran S (2013) Integrated Approach for Identifying
Suitable Sites for Rainwater Harvesting Structures for Groundwater Augmentation in Basaltic Terrain. Water
Resour Manag 27(5):1279–1299
Diamond A, Parteno J (2004) A GIS-based habitat suitability model for the endangered species Red Mulberry
(Morus Rubra L.) in the Niagara Region. [Online] URL:<http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/research/
geog4480_w2004/Group13/index htm>
El-Awar FA, Makke MK, Zurayk RA, Mohtar RH (2000) A Hydro-Spatial Hierarchical Method for Siting Water
Harvesting Reservoirs in dry. Appl Eng Agric 16(4):395–404
Gandhi AO, Masoom SM (1990) A case history of artificial-recharge by trenching in nalla bed at Sawangi in
district of Aurangabad, Maharashtra. In the proceedings volume of the All India seminar on “Modern
Techniques of rain water harvesting, water conservation and artificial recharge for drinking water, affores-
tation, horticulture and agriculture”, pp. 887–894
Identification of Potential Sites for Groundwater Recharge 3339

Garfì M, Tondelli S, Bonoli A (2009) Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Waste Management in Saharawi
Refugee Camps. Waste Manag 29(10):2729–2739
Ghayoumian J, Ghermezcheshme B, Feiznia S, Noroozi AA (2005) Integrating GIS and DSS for
Identification of Suitable Areas for Artificial Recharge, Case Study, Meimeh Basin, Isfahan, Iran. Env
Geol 47(4):493–500
Huang CC, Yeh HF, Lin HI, Lee ST, Hsu KC, Lee CH (2013) Groundwater Recharge and Exploitative Potential
Zone Mapping Using GIS and GOD Techniques. Environ Earth Sci 68(1):267–280
Jaiswal RK, Mukherjee S, Krishnamurthy J, Saxena R (2003) Role of Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques for
Generation of Groundwater Prospect Zones Towards Rural Development: An Approach. Int J Remote Sens
24(5):993–1008
Janssen R, Van Herwijnen M (1994) Multiobjective Decision Support for Environmental Management. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (Netherlands), p 232
Khouri J, Deroubi A (1990) Water Resources in the Arab World. UNESCO/ACSAD, Damascus, p 166
Kumar PK, Gopinath G, Seralathan P (2007) Application of Remote Sensing and GIS for the Demarcation of
Groundwater Potential Zones of a River Basin in Kerala, Southwest Coast of India. Int J Remote Sens
28(24):5583–5601
Kumar MG, Agarwal AK, Bali R (2008) Delineation of Potential Sites for Water Harvesting Structures Using
Remote Sensing and GIS. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 36:323–334
Liu YB, De Smedt F) 2004 (WetSpa extension, a GIS-based hydrologic model for flood prediction and watershed
management. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium, 1–108.
Malczewski J (2004) GIS-Based Land-use Suitability Analysis: A Critical Overview. Prog Plan 62(1):3–65
Mkiramwinyi FO (2006) Identification of Potential Sites for Rainwater Harvesting Using Remote Sensing and
GIS in the Makanya Catchment, Same District, Northern Tanzania. Sokoine University of Agriculture,
Morogoro, Tanzania, MSc Thesis
Murthy KSR (2000) Groundwater Potential in a Semi-Arid Region of Andhra Pradesh: A Geographical
Information System Approach. Int J Remote Sens 21(9):1867–1884
Nag SK, Ghosh P (2012) Delineation of Groundwater Potential Zone in Chhatna Block, Bankura
District, West Bengal, India Using Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques. Environ Earth Sciences
70(5):2115–2127
Nilkalja MV, Masoom SM (1990) Artificial-recharge through underground Bandharas in the proceedings volume
of the All India seminar on “Modern Techniques of rain water harvesting, water conservation and artificial
recharge for drinking water, afforestation, horticulture and agriculture”, pp. 535–541.
Novaline JRM, Sundaram A, Natarajan T (1993) Watershed Development Using Geographic Information
System Techniques. Int J Remote Sens 14:3239–3247
Padmavathy AS, Ganesha RK, Yogarajan N, Thangavel P (1993) Check dam Site Selection Using GIS
Approach. Adv Space Res 13(11):123–127
Radulovic M, Stevanovic Z, Radulovic M (2012) A new Approach in Assessing Recharge of Highly Karstified
Terrains–Montenegro Case Studies. Environ Earth Sci 65(8):2221–2230
Rahman MA, Rusteberg B, Gogu RC, Lobo Ferreira JP, Sauter M (2012) A new Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision
Support Tool for Site Selection for Implementation of Managed Aquifer Recharge. J Environ Manag 99:61–
75
Ravi Shankar MN, Mohan G (2005) A GIS Based Hydrogeomorphic Approach for Identification of
Site-Specific Artificial-Recharge Techniques in the Deccan Volcanic Province. J Earth Syst Sci
114(5):505–514
Ravishankar MN, Mohan G (2005) A GIS Based Hydrogeomorphic Approach for Identification of Site-Specific
Artificial-Recharge Techniques in the Deccan Volcanic Province. J Earth Syst Sci 114(5):505–514
Saaty TL (1977) A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures. J Math Psychol 15:57–68
Saaty TL (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. NY. USA, McGraw-Hill, New York
Saaty TL (1990) How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Eur J Oper Res 48:9–26
Saaty TL (1994) Fundamentals of Decision-Making and Priority Theory With the Analytic Hierarchy Process.
RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA, U.S.A
Saaty TL (2008) Decision Making With the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int J of Serv Scie 1(1):83–98
Saraf AK, Choudhury PR (1998) Integrated Remote Sensing and GIS for Groundwater Exploration and
Identification of Artificial Recharge Sites. Int J Remote Sens 19(10):1825–1841
Sargaonkar AP, Rathi B, Baile A (2011) Identifying Potential Sites for Artificial Groundwater Recharge in sub-
Watershed of River Kanhan, India. Enviro Earth Sciences 62(5):1099–1108
Saud AG, Mohamed FS, Asif UZ (2013) Saudi Arabia Confronts with Water Scarcity: An Insight. Int J of Water
Resour and Arid Environ 2(4):218–225
3340 S.H. Mahmoud et al.

Sener E, Davraz A, Ozcelik M (2005) An Integration of GIS and Remote Sensing in Groundwater Investigations:
A Case Study in Burdur, Turkey. Hydrol J 13:826–834
Shereif HM (2014a) Delineation of potential sites for groundwater recharge using a GIS-based decision support
system. Environmental Earth Sciences. doi:10.1007/s12665-014-3249
Shereif HM (2014b) Investigation of rainfall–runoff modeling for Egypt by using remote sensing and GIS
integration. CATENA 120:111–121
Shereif HM, Mohammad FS, Alazba AA (2014) Determination of Potential Runoff Coefficient for Al-Baha
Region. Saudi Arabia using GIS Arabian journal of Geoscience. doi:10.1007/s12517-014-1303-4
Siebert S, Burke J, Faures JM, Frenken K, Hoogeveen J, Döll P, Portmann FT (2010) Groundwater use for
Irrigation–a Global Inventory. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 7(3):3977–4021
Soares PV, Pereira SY, Simoes SJC, de Paula BG, Barbosa SA, Trannin ICB (2012) The Definition of Potential
Infiltration Areas in Guaratinguetá Watershed, Paraíba do Sul Basin, Southeastern Brazil: An Integrated
Approach Using Physical and Land-use Elements. Environ Earth Scie 67(6):1685–1694
Todd DK (1959) Annotated Bibliography on Artificial Recharge of Groundwater Through 1954. USGS Water
Supply Paper 1477:115
Vahidnia MH, Alesheikh A, Alimohammadi A, Bassiri A (2008) Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process in GIS
Application. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci 37(B2):593–596

View publication stats