Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Siting military base camps through an MCDA framework Cover

Siting military base camps through an MCDA framework

Open Access
|Nov 2021

Figures & Tables

Tab. 1

Key criteria for base camp siting, categorised by data type

CriteriaType of data
PopulationSocial/demographic
Enemy/threat
Interference/signalCapability analysis
RoadsCivil infrastructure
Local utilities
SlopeTerrain/environment
Soils
Land cover
Aquifer access
Land use
Tab. 2

Average ranking and importance order comparison and calculated weighting

CriteriaCalculated weight (%)
Roads12.6
Threat/enemy12.0
Slope11.7
Soils11.5
Population10.1
Local utilities9.8
Land cover8.9
Aquifer access8.1
Interference/signal7.8
Land use7.5
Tab. 3

Alternative regions for suitable base camp sites based on criteria scores

AlternativesRoadsThreat/enemySlopeSoilLocal utilitiesPopulationLand coverAquifer accessInterference/signalLand use
Site 10.60.80.20.80.70.30.70.30.80.5
Site 20.90.20.00.30.50.20.30.90.40.3
Site 30.90.80.30.70.80.90.30.50.00.3
Site 40.70.30.10.90.30.80.60.40.30.8
Site 50.90.80.60.90.70.70.70.50.70.9
Site 60.40.10.50.10.40.20.80.00.30.2
Site 70.90.90.90.60.60.70.80.90.90.5
Tab. 4

Ranking of alternative scores

AlternativesScore
Site 70.78
Site 50.75
Site 30.58
Site 10.57
Site 40.52
Site 20.40
Site 60.30
Fig. 1

MCDA factor distribution by alternative site. MCDA, multicriteria decision analysis.

Fig. 2

Colour-coded ranking of alternative sites within an AoI. AoI, area of interest.

Tab. B1

Four sets of criteria weights used for sensitivity analysis

CriteriaCalculated weight (%)Equal weight (%)Rank-reciprocal weight (%)Opposite-weight scenario (%)
Roads12.610.034.13.4
Threat/Enemy12.010.017.13.8
Slope11.710.011.44.3
Soils11.510.08.54.9
Population10.110.06.85.7
Local utilities9.810.05.76.8
Land cover8.910.04.98.5
Aquifer access8.110.04.311.4
Interference/Signal7.810.03.817.1
Land use7.510.03.434.1
Tab. B2

Rank ordering of alternative sites across weighting schemes

AlternativesCalculated weightEqual weightRank reciprocal weightOpposite-weight scenario
Site 13444
Site 26666
Site 34335
Site 45553
Site 52221
Site 67777
Site 71112
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jms-2021-0014 | Journal eISSN: 1799-3350 | Journal ISSN: 2242-3524
Language: English
Page range: 10 - 21
Submitted on: Feb 1, 2018
Accepted on: Jul 10, 2021
Published on: Nov 7, 2021
Published by: National Defense University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2021 Jeffrey C. Cegan, Maureen S. Golan, published by National Defense University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.