Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Average ranking and importance order comparison and calculated weighting
| Criteria | Calculated weight (%) |
|---|---|
| Roads | 12.6 |
| Threat/enemy | 12.0 |
| Slope | 11.7 |
| Soils | 11.5 |
| Population | 10.1 |
| Local utilities | 9.8 |
| Land cover | 8.9 |
| Aquifer access | 8.1 |
| Interference/signal | 7.8 |
| Land use | 7.5 |
Alternative regions for suitable base camp sites based on criteria scores
| Alternatives | Roads | Threat/enemy | Slope | Soil | Local utilities | Population | Land cover | Aquifer access | Interference/signal | Land use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site 1 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| Site 2 | 0.9 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| Site 3 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0.3 |
| Site 4 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.8 |
| Site 5 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 |
| Site 6 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 0.2 |
| Site 7 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.5 |
Rank ordering of alternative sites across weighting schemes
| Alternatives | Calculated weight | Equal weight | Rank reciprocal weight | Opposite-weight scenario |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site 1 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Site 2 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Site 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Site 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Site 5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Site 6 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 7 |
| Site 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Key criteria for base camp siting, categorised by data type
| Criteria | Type of data |
|---|---|
| Population | Social/demographic |
| Enemy/threat | |
| Interference/signal | Capability analysis |
| Roads | Civil infrastructure |
| Local utilities | |
| Slope | Terrain/environment |
| Soils | |
| Land cover | |
| Aquifer access | |
| Land use |
Ranking of alternative scores
| Alternatives | Score |
|---|---|
| Site 7 | 0.78 |
| Site 5 | 0.75 |
| Site 3 | 0.58 |
| Site 1 | 0.57 |
| Site 4 | 0.52 |
| Site 2 | 0.40 |
| Site 6 | 0.30 |
Four sets of criteria weights used for sensitivity analysis
| Criteria | Calculated weight (%) | Equal weight (%) | Rank-reciprocal weight (%) | Opposite-weight scenario (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roads | 12.6 | 10.0 | 34.1 | 3.4 |
| Threat/Enemy | 12.0 | 10.0 | 17.1 | 3.8 |
| Slope | 11.7 | 10.0 | 11.4 | 4.3 |
| Soils | 11.5 | 10.0 | 8.5 | 4.9 |
| Population | 10.1 | 10.0 | 6.8 | 5.7 |
| Local utilities | 9.8 | 10.0 | 5.7 | 6.8 |
| Land cover | 8.9 | 10.0 | 4.9 | 8.5 |
| Aquifer access | 8.1 | 10.0 | 4.3 | 11.4 |
| Interference/Signal | 7.8 | 10.0 | 3.8 | 17.1 |
| Land use | 7.5 | 10.0 | 3.4 | 34.1 |