Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Elsevier, Journal of Environmental Management, 4(92), p. 1215-1224

DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.12.009

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Reliability of groundwater vulnerability maps obtained through statistical methods

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Statistical methods are widely used in environmental studies to evaluate natural hazards. Within groundwater vulnerability in particular, statistical methods are used to support decisions about environmental planning and management. The production of vulnerability maps obtained by statistical methods can greatly help decision making. One of the key points in all of these studies is the validation of the model outputs, which is performed through the application of various techniques to analyze the quality and reliability of the final results and to evaluate the model having the best performance. In this study, a groundwater vulnerability assessment to nitrate contamination was performed for the shallow aquifer located in the Province of Milan (Italy). The Weights of Evidence modeling technique was used to generate six model outputs, each one with a different number of input predictive factors. Considering that a vulnerability map is meaningful and useful only if it represents the study area through a limited number of classes with different degrees of vulnerability, the spatial agreement of different reclassified maps has been evaluated through the kappa statistics and a series of validation procedures has been proposed and applied to evaluate the reliability of the reclassified maps. Results show that performance is not directly related to the number of input predictor factors and that is possible to identify, among apparently similar maps, those best representing groundwater vulnerability in the study area. Thus, vulnerability maps generated using statistical modeling techniques have to be carefully handled before they are disseminated. Indeed, the results may appear to be excellent and final maps may perform quite well when, in fact, the depicted spatial distribution of vulnerability is greatly different from the actual one. For this reason, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the obtained results using multiple statistical techniques that are capable of providing quantitative insight into the analysis of the results. This evaluation should be done at least to reduce the questionability of the results and so to limit the number of potential choices.