Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Determination of Land Suitability Classes By Using Integrated Geographic Information Systems With Multi-Criteria Decision Making Analysis

Year 2018, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 60 - 72, 31.12.2018

Mert Dedeoğlu Orhan Dengiz

Abstract

Today, Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approaches integrated with GIS provide the opportunity to reliably produce land suitability classes and maps. In this study, the process of land evaluation was performed by using GIS and MCDM integration to determine the agricultural potential for the area of the Konya Beşgözlerler K.O.P in approximately 5.140 ha by using the Linear Combination Technique (LCT) and the map of land suitability was produced. The factors of LCT model, are directly affect the cultivation of crops, chosen according to Hybird System for the classification of land use as physical (Depth, Slope, Grade, Drainage, Stony) and chemical (pH, EC, CaCO3, Organic Matter) soil properties and subclass scores of the factors were made values between 0 and 4 according to the degree of restriction in plant cultivation. Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP), a multi-criteria decision approach, was used to determine the weight values for paired comparisons of selected criteria. LCT was determined that 106.5 hectares (2.07%) of land is classified as "non-agricultural", 1250 ha (24.35%) as "medium" and 3778 ha (73.58%) as "weak". It was determined that the depth, drainage conditions and stony had higher effect on the final score values of the land suitability classes. As a result of the study, it has been concluded that GIS-AHS integration is a powerful tool for modeling requiring complex alternative choices and is used as an alternative method in land evaluation studies with LCT model.

Keywords

Analytical Hierarchical Process GIS Konya Land Evaluation Linear Combination Technique

References

  • Ahmed, G. B., Shariff, A. R. M., Balasundram, S. K., ve bin Abdullah, A. F. 2016. Agriculture land suitability analysis evaluation based multi criteria and GIS approach. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 37, No. 1, p. 012044). IOP Publishing.
  • Akinci, H., Ozalp, A.Y., Turgut, B., 2013. Agriculture land use suitability analysis using GIS and AHP technique. Comput. Electron. Agric. 97, 71–82
  • Albaji, M., & Hemadi, J. 2011. Investigation of different irrigation systems based on the parametric evaluation approach on the Dasht Bozorg Plain. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 66(3), 163-169.
  • Aldababseh, A., Temimi, M., Maghelal, P., Branch, O., & Wulfmeyer, V. (2018). Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Irrigated Agriculture Suitability to Achieve Food Security in an Arid Environment. Sustainability, 10(3), 803.
  • Anonim, 2015, http://www.dmi.gov.tr/iklim/iklim.aspx. (erişim tarihi: 24.08.2015 )
  • Arshad, M. A., & Martin, S. 2002. Identifying critical limits for soil quality indicators in agro-ecosystems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 88(2), 153-160.
  • Ashraf, S., Munokyan, R., Normohammadan, B., Babaei, A., 2010. Qualitative land suitability evaluation for growth of wheat in Northeast of Iran. Res. J. Biol. Sci. 5, 548–552.
  • Borůvka, L., Vacek, O., & Jehlička, J. 2005. Principal component analysis as a tool to indicate the origin of potentially toxic elements in soils. Geoderma, 128(3-4), 289-300.
  • Briza, Y., Dileonardo, F., Spisni, A., 2001. Land evaluation in the province of Ben Slimane, Morocco. 21st Course Professional Master. Remote Sensing and Natural Resource Evaluation. 10 November 2000–22 June 2001, vol. 21. IAO, Florence, Italy, 28–53.
  • Cengiz, T., Akbulak, C., 2009. Application of analytical hierarchy process and geographic information systems in land-use suitability evaluation: a case study of Dumrek village. Int. J. Sustain. Develop. World Ecol. 16 (4), 286–294.
  • De la Rosa, Diepen, V., 2003. Qualitative and quantitative land evaluation. In: Verhey, W. (Ed.), Land Use and Land Cover, Encyclopedia in Life Support System (EOLESS-UNESCO). Eolss, Oxford
  • Dedeoğlu, M. 2017. Sarayönü Beşgözlerler KOP alanı detaylı toprak etüdü ve farklı yöntemlerle arazi değerlendirmesi. Doktora Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 225 sayfa, Selçuklu-Konya.
  • Demirağ Turan, İ., Dengiz, O. 2017. Erosion Risk Prediction Using Multi-Criteria Assessment in Ankara Güvenç Basin. Journal of Agriculture Science, 23 (3); 285-297.
  • Dengiz, O. ve Sarıoğlu, F. 2011. Samsun ilinin potansiyel tarım alanlarının genel dağılımları ve toprak etüd ve haritalama çalışmalarının önemi, Anadolu Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 26 (3), 241-253.
  • Dengiz, O. ve Usul, M. 2018. Multi-criteria approach with linear combination technique and analytical hierarchy process in land evaluation studies. Eurasian J Soil Sci, 7:1, 20 – 29
  • Dengiz, O., & Sarıoğlu, F. E. 2013. Arazi değerlendirme çalışmalarında parametrik bir yaklaşım olan doğrusal kombinasyon tekniği. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi-Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 19, 101-112.
  • Dent, D. ve Young, A., 1981, Soil survey and land evaluation, George Allen & Unwin., p.
  • Eastman, R.J., 2006. IDRISI Andes. In: Guide to GIS and Image Processing. Clark Labs, Clark University.
  • Elsheikh, R., Shariff, A. R. B. M., Amiri, F., Ahmad, N. B., Balasundram, S. K., & Soom, M. A. M. 2013. Agriculture Land Suitability Evaluator (ALSE): A decision and planning support tool for tropical and subtropical crops. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 93, 98-110.
  • ESRI. 2004. ArcGIS Desktop Developer Guid: ArcGIS 9.1. ESRI, Redlands, CA, 335pp.
  • FAO. 1976. A Framevork for land evaluation, Soils Bulletin: 32, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
  • FAO. 1977. A Framework for Land Evaluation, International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, 22 (Wageningen, NL), 87.
  • FAO. 1990. Guidelines for soil profile description, FAO, Rome, Italy.
  • Güzel, A.. 1983. Sarayönü–Kadınhanı (Konya) Dolayının Hidrojeoloji İncelemesi, SÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, Konya.
  • Hazelton, P. A., & Murphy, B. 2007). Interpreting Soil Test Results, What Do All The Numbers Mean?, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Publishing.
  • Jones Jr, J. B. 2000. Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis, CRC press, p.
  • Kacar, B. ve Katkat, A. 2011. Bitki Besleme, Nobel Yayınları (5. Baskı), 1-678.
  • Karlen, D., Andrews, S. ve Doran, J. 2001. Soil quality: current concepts and applications, Advances in agronomy, 74, 1-40.
  • Kumar, N. V., & Ganesh, L. S. 1996. A simulation-based evaluation of the approximate and the exact eigenvector methods employed in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3), 656-662.
  • Malczewski J .2004. GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview. Progress in Planning 62; 3–65
  • Moeinaddini, M., Khorasani, N., Danehkar, A., & Darvishsefat, A. A. 2010. Siting MSW landfill using weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in GIS environment (case study: Karaj). Waste management, 30(5), 912-920.
  • Moran, E. F., Brondizio, E. S., Tucker, J. M., da Silva-Forsberg, M. C., McCracken, S., & Falesi, I. 2000. Effects of soil fertility and land-use on forest succession in Amazonia. Forest Ecology and Management, 139(1-3), 93-108.
  • MTA. 2009. Kadınhanı-Sarayönü-Sülüklü (Konya) Dolayının Jeolojisi, Maden Teknik Arama Müdürlüğü, Jeoloji Etütleri Dairesi, 9030.
  • Mueller, L., Schindler, U., Mirschel, W., Shepherd, T. G., Ball, B. C., Helming, K., Rogasik, J., Eulenstein, F. ve Wiggering, H. 2010. Assessing the productivity function of soils. A review, Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 30 (3), 601-614.
  • Patrono, A .1998. Multi-Criteria Analysis and Geographic Information Systems: Analysis of Natural Areas and Ecological Distributions. Multicriteria Analysis for Land-Use Management, Edited by Euro Beinat and Peter Nijkamp, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Environment and Management-Volume: 9, pp: 271- 292, AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands
  • Pierce, F., Larson, W., Dowdy, R. ve Graham, W. 1983. Productivity of soils: Assessing long-term changes due to erosion, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 38 (1), 39-44.
  • Pourkhabbaz, H. R., Javanmardi, S., & Faraji Sabokbar, H. A. 2014. Suitability analysis for determining potential agricultural land use by the multi-criteria decision making models SAW and VIKOR-AHP (Case study: Takestan-Qazvin Plain). Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 16(5), 1005-1016.
  • Riley, H., Pommeresche, R., Eltun, R., Hansen, S., & Korsaeth, A. 2008. Soil structure, organic matter and earthworm activity in a comparison of cropping systems with contrasting tillage, rotations, fertilizer levels and manure use. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 124(3-4), 275-284.
  • Rogowski, A. ve Wolf, J. 1994. Incorporating variability into soil map unit delineations, Soil science society of America journal, 58 (1), 163-174.
  • Romano, G., Dal Sasso, P., Liuzzi, G. T., & Gentile, F. 2015. Multi-criteria decision analysis for land suitability mapping in a rural area of Southern Italy. Land Use Policy, 48, 131-143.
  • Saaty, T.L. 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences 1, 83–98.
  • Saaty,T. L. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York
  • Sharififar, A. 2012. Assessment of different methods of soil suitability classification for wheat cultivation. Journal of Agrobiology, 29(2), 47-54.
  • Smyth, A. ve Dumanski, J., 1993, FESLM: An international framework for evaluating sustainable land management, FAO Rome, p.
  • Soil Survey Staff. 2014. Soil Taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys, US Government Printing Office, p.
  • Şenol, S., 1983. Arazi Toplulaştırma Çalışmalarında Kullanılabilir Niceliksel Yeni Bir Arazi Derecelendirme Yönteminin Geliştirilmesi Üzerine Araştırmalar, Doktora Tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Adana.
  • Ulgen, N. ve Yurtsever, N. 1984. Turkiye gubre ve gubreleme rehberi, Yayin. Tarim Orman ve Koyisleri Bakanligi. Topraksu Genel Mudurlugu ((47).
  • USDA, 2014. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, Agriculture Handbook, 436.
  • Verheye, W. H., 2009. Land use, land cover and soil sciences, Citeseer, p.
  • Yang, F., Zeng, G., Du, C., Tang, L., Zhou, J., & Li, Z. 2008. Spatial analyzing system for urban land-use management based on GIS and multi-criteria assessment modeling. Progress in Natural Science, 18(10), 1279-1284.

Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri İle Entegre Edilen Çok Kriterli Karar Destek Analiz Yaklaşımı Kullanılarak Arazi Uygunluk Sınıflarının Belirlenmesi

Year 2018, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 60 - 72, 31.12.2018

Mert Dedeoğlu Orhan Dengiz

Abstract

Günümüzde CBS ile entegre bir şekilde yürütülen
Çok Kriterli Karar Destek Analiz (ÇKKD) 
yaklaşımları arazi uygunluk sınıflarının ve haritalarının güvenilir bir
şekilde üretilmesine fırsat sunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada yaklaşık
5.140 ha büyüklüğünde Konya - Beşgözlerler K.O.P. arazilerinin Doğrusal
Kombinasyon Tekniği (DKT) ile tarımsal potansiyelinin belirlenmesi için CBS ve ÇKKD
entegrasyonu kullanılarak arazi değerlendirmesi yapılmış ve bölge
topraklarının tarımsal kullanıma uygunluk haritası üretilmiştir. DKT modelinde
tarımsal kullanıma uygunluk sınıflaması için kültür bitkisi yetiştiriciliğini
doğrudan etkileyen faktörler fiziksel (Toprak Derinliği, Eğim, Bünye, Drenaj,
Taşlık) ve kimysal (pH, EC, CaCO3, Organik Madde) toprak özellikleri olarak
Hybird Sisteme göre seçilmiş ve yetiştiriciliği kısıtlama derecelerine göre 0 –
4 arasında alt sınıf skorlamaları yapılmıştır. Faktörlerin ikili
karşılaştırmalarına göre ağırlık değerlerinin belirlenmesinde çok kriterli karar
verme yaklaşımı olan Analitik Hiyerarşik Süreç (AHS)
kullanılmıştır. DKT ile uygunluk sınıflamaları sonucu 106.5 ha
(% 2.07) arazinin “ tarım dışı”, 1250 ha (% 24.34) arazinin “uygun” ve 3778 ha
(% 73.58) arazinin “az uygun” nitelikte sınıflandığı belirlenmiştir. Çalışma sonucu
tarımsal kullanıma uygunluk sınıflarının son skor değerlerine derinlik, drenaj ve
taşlık faktörlerinin etki derecelerinin daha yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir. CBS-AHS
entegrasyonun karmaşık alternatif seçimler gerektiren modellemeler için güçlü
bir araç olduğu ve DKT modeli ile arazi değerlendirme çalışmalarında alternatif
bir metot olarak kullanılması önerilmiştir.

Keywords

Analitik Hiyerarşik Süreç Arazi Değerlendirme CBS Doğrusal Kombinasyon Tekniği Konya

References

  • Ahmed, G. B., Shariff, A. R. M., Balasundram, S. K., ve bin Abdullah, A. F. 2016. Agriculture land suitability analysis evaluation based multi criteria and GIS approach. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 37, No. 1, p. 012044). IOP Publishing.
  • Akinci, H., Ozalp, A.Y., Turgut, B., 2013. Agriculture land use suitability analysis using GIS and AHP technique. Comput. Electron. Agric. 97, 71–82
  • Albaji, M., & Hemadi, J. 2011. Investigation of different irrigation systems based on the parametric evaluation approach on the Dasht Bozorg Plain. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 66(3), 163-169.
  • Aldababseh, A., Temimi, M., Maghelal, P., Branch, O., & Wulfmeyer, V. (2018). Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Irrigated Agriculture Suitability to Achieve Food Security in an Arid Environment. Sustainability, 10(3), 803.
  • Anonim, 2015, http://www.dmi.gov.tr/iklim/iklim.aspx. (erişim tarihi: 24.08.2015 )
  • Arshad, M. A., & Martin, S. 2002. Identifying critical limits for soil quality indicators in agro-ecosystems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 88(2), 153-160.
  • Ashraf, S., Munokyan, R., Normohammadan, B., Babaei, A., 2010. Qualitative land suitability evaluation for growth of wheat in Northeast of Iran. Res. J. Biol. Sci. 5, 548–552.
  • Borůvka, L., Vacek, O., & Jehlička, J. 2005. Principal component analysis as a tool to indicate the origin of potentially toxic elements in soils. Geoderma, 128(3-4), 289-300.
  • Briza, Y., Dileonardo, F., Spisni, A., 2001. Land evaluation in the province of Ben Slimane, Morocco. 21st Course Professional Master. Remote Sensing and Natural Resource Evaluation. 10 November 2000–22 June 2001, vol. 21. IAO, Florence, Italy, 28–53.
  • Cengiz, T., Akbulak, C., 2009. Application of analytical hierarchy process and geographic information systems in land-use suitability evaluation: a case study of Dumrek village. Int. J. Sustain. Develop. World Ecol. 16 (4), 286–294.
  • De la Rosa, Diepen, V., 2003. Qualitative and quantitative land evaluation. In: Verhey, W. (Ed.), Land Use and Land Cover, Encyclopedia in Life Support System (EOLESS-UNESCO). Eolss, Oxford
  • Dedeoğlu, M. 2017. Sarayönü Beşgözlerler KOP alanı detaylı toprak etüdü ve farklı yöntemlerle arazi değerlendirmesi. Doktora Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 225 sayfa, Selçuklu-Konya.
  • Demirağ Turan, İ., Dengiz, O. 2017. Erosion Risk Prediction Using Multi-Criteria Assessment in Ankara Güvenç Basin. Journal of Agriculture Science, 23 (3); 285-297.
  • Dengiz, O. ve Sarıoğlu, F. 2011. Samsun ilinin potansiyel tarım alanlarının genel dağılımları ve toprak etüd ve haritalama çalışmalarının önemi, Anadolu Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 26 (3), 241-253.
  • Dengiz, O. ve Usul, M. 2018. Multi-criteria approach with linear combination technique and analytical hierarchy process in land evaluation studies. Eurasian J Soil Sci, 7:1, 20 – 29
  • Dengiz, O., & Sarıoğlu, F. E. 2013. Arazi değerlendirme çalışmalarında parametrik bir yaklaşım olan doğrusal kombinasyon tekniği. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi-Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 19, 101-112.
  • Dent, D. ve Young, A., 1981, Soil survey and land evaluation, George Allen & Unwin., p.
  • Eastman, R.J., 2006. IDRISI Andes. In: Guide to GIS and Image Processing. Clark Labs, Clark University.
  • Elsheikh, R., Shariff, A. R. B. M., Amiri, F., Ahmad, N. B., Balasundram, S. K., & Soom, M. A. M. 2013. Agriculture Land Suitability Evaluator (ALSE): A decision and planning support tool for tropical and subtropical crops. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 93, 98-110.
  • ESRI. 2004. ArcGIS Desktop Developer Guid: ArcGIS 9.1. ESRI, Redlands, CA, 335pp.
  • FAO. 1976. A Framevork for land evaluation, Soils Bulletin: 32, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.
  • FAO. 1977. A Framework for Land Evaluation, International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement, 22 (Wageningen, NL), 87.
  • FAO. 1990. Guidelines for soil profile description, FAO, Rome, Italy.
  • Güzel, A.. 1983. Sarayönü–Kadınhanı (Konya) Dolayının Hidrojeoloji İncelemesi, SÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, Konya.
  • Hazelton, P. A., & Murphy, B. 2007). Interpreting Soil Test Results, What Do All The Numbers Mean?, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Publishing.
  • Jones Jr, J. B. 2000. Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis, CRC press, p.
  • Kacar, B. ve Katkat, A. 2011. Bitki Besleme, Nobel Yayınları (5. Baskı), 1-678.
  • Karlen, D., Andrews, S. ve Doran, J. 2001. Soil quality: current concepts and applications, Advances in agronomy, 74, 1-40.
  • Kumar, N. V., & Ganesh, L. S. 1996. A simulation-based evaluation of the approximate and the exact eigenvector methods employed in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3), 656-662.
  • Malczewski J .2004. GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview. Progress in Planning 62; 3–65
  • Moeinaddini, M., Khorasani, N., Danehkar, A., & Darvishsefat, A. A. 2010. Siting MSW landfill using weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in GIS environment (case study: Karaj). Waste management, 30(5), 912-920.
  • Moran, E. F., Brondizio, E. S., Tucker, J. M., da Silva-Forsberg, M. C., McCracken, S., & Falesi, I. 2000. Effects of soil fertility and land-use on forest succession in Amazonia. Forest Ecology and Management, 139(1-3), 93-108.
  • MTA. 2009. Kadınhanı-Sarayönü-Sülüklü (Konya) Dolayının Jeolojisi, Maden Teknik Arama Müdürlüğü, Jeoloji Etütleri Dairesi, 9030.
  • Mueller, L., Schindler, U., Mirschel, W., Shepherd, T. G., Ball, B. C., Helming, K., Rogasik, J., Eulenstein, F. ve Wiggering, H. 2010. Assessing the productivity function of soils. A review, Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 30 (3), 601-614.
  • Patrono, A .1998. Multi-Criteria Analysis and Geographic Information Systems: Analysis of Natural Areas and Ecological Distributions. Multicriteria Analysis for Land-Use Management, Edited by Euro Beinat and Peter Nijkamp, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Environment and Management-Volume: 9, pp: 271- 292, AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands
  • Pierce, F., Larson, W., Dowdy, R. ve Graham, W. 1983. Productivity of soils: Assessing long-term changes due to erosion, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 38 (1), 39-44.
  • Pourkhabbaz, H. R., Javanmardi, S., & Faraji Sabokbar, H. A. 2014. Suitability analysis for determining potential agricultural land use by the multi-criteria decision making models SAW and VIKOR-AHP (Case study: Takestan-Qazvin Plain). Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 16(5), 1005-1016.
  • Riley, H., Pommeresche, R., Eltun, R., Hansen, S., & Korsaeth, A. 2008. Soil structure, organic matter and earthworm activity in a comparison of cropping systems with contrasting tillage, rotations, fertilizer levels and manure use. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 124(3-4), 275-284.
  • Rogowski, A. ve Wolf, J. 1994. Incorporating variability into soil map unit delineations, Soil science society of America journal, 58 (1), 163-174.
  • Romano, G., Dal Sasso, P., Liuzzi, G. T., & Gentile, F. 2015. Multi-criteria decision analysis for land suitability mapping in a rural area of Southern Italy. Land Use Policy, 48, 131-143.
  • Saaty, T.L. 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences 1, 83–98.
  • Saaty,T. L. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York
  • Sharififar, A. 2012. Assessment of different methods of soil suitability classification for wheat cultivation. Journal of Agrobiology, 29(2), 47-54.
  • Smyth, A. ve Dumanski, J., 1993, FESLM: An international framework for evaluating sustainable land management, FAO Rome, p.
  • Soil Survey Staff. 2014. Soil Taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys, US Government Printing Office, p.
  • Şenol, S., 1983. Arazi Toplulaştırma Çalışmalarında Kullanılabilir Niceliksel Yeni Bir Arazi Derecelendirme Yönteminin Geliştirilmesi Üzerine Araştırmalar, Doktora Tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Adana.
  • Ulgen, N. ve Yurtsever, N. 1984. Turkiye gubre ve gubreleme rehberi, Yayin. Tarim Orman ve Koyisleri Bakanligi. Topraksu Genel Mudurlugu ((47).
  • USDA, 2014. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, Agriculture Handbook, 436.
  • Verheye, W. H., 2009. Land use, land cover and soil sciences, Citeseer, p.
  • Yang, F., Zeng, G., Du, C., Tang, L., Zhou, J., & Li, Z. 2008. Spatial analyzing system for urban land-use management based on GIS and multi-criteria assessment modeling. Progress in Natural Science, 18(10), 1279-1284.
There are 50 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Agricultural Engineering
Journal Section Research
Authors

Mert Dedeoğlu

Orhan Dengiz This is me

Publication Date December 31, 2018
Submission Date November 22, 2018
Acceptance Date December 28, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 13 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Dedeoğlu, M., & Dengiz, O. (2018). Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri İle Entegre Edilen Çok Kriterli Karar Destek Analiz Yaklaşımı Kullanılarak Arazi Uygunluk Sınıflarının Belirlenmesi. Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2), 60-72.

24611

Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.