A GIS-based groundwater potential assessment model was developed for Barpeta District using geospatial techniques and the Weighted Overlay Method. The main objective of the study is to identify groundwater potential zones for sustainable water resource planning and management. Multiple thematic layers such as slope, drainage density, soil type, rainfall, geomorphology, land use/land cover, and lineament density were prepared from SRTM DEM and satellite datasets. These layers were processed in ArcGIS by assigning suitable weights and ranks to generate the Groundwater Potential Index (GWPI) and to determine the most suitable groundwater potential zones. For the entire study area, regions having gentle slope, permeable soil, agricultural land cover, and lower drainage density were found to be the most favorable groundwater zones, mainly concentrated in the central and northern parts of the district; in contrast, areas with steep slope and higher drainage density exhibited comparatively lower groundwater potential.

For The implementation of the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach, particularly the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) integrated with GIS and Remote Sensing techniques, proved effective for delineating Groundwater Potential Zones (GWPZ) across Barpeta District. The final groundwater potential map generated through weighted overlay analysis successfully identified areas having different levels of groundwater favourability within the district. The analysis revealed that High and Very High groundwater potential zones are predominantly concentrated in the southern and central floodplain regions characterized by gentle slopes, permeable alluvial deposits, and favourable land cover conditions. In contrast, Low groundwater potential zones are mainly confined to comparatively elevated and dissected upland areas where runoff is higher and infiltration capacity is lower. The weighted overlay analysis demonstrated that geomorphology and geology were the most influential thematic parameters controlling groundwater occurrence, contributing significantly to the final groundwater potential output. The study also indicated that areas covered by vegetation, agricultural land, and water bodies exhibited comparatively higher groundwater recharge conditions due to enhanced infiltration and lower surface runoff. Conversely, built-up and settlement areas showed relatively lower groundwater potential because of impervious surfaces restricting natural recharge. The generated groundwater potential zonation map therefore provides valuable information for sustainable groundwater management, artificial recharge planning, groundwater exploration, and future water resource development within the district.

1)Anil N.C., G. Jai Sankar, M. Jagannadha Rao, I. V. R. K. V. Prasad and U. Sailaja., 2011. “Studies on land use/land cover and change detection from parts of South West Godavari District, AP– using remote sensing and GIS techniques.” J. Ind. Geophys. Union 15, no. 4: 187-194. 2)Biswas, S.S., and Pani, P., 2015. Estimation of soil erosion using RUSLE and GIS techniques: a case study of Barakar River basin, Jharkhand, India. 3)Borgogain, A., and Bora, A.K., 2019. Soil loss estimation of Jiadhal river basin, Assam, using revised universal soil loss equation model (RUSLE). 4)Boughton,W.C.,1989. A review of the USDA SCS curve number method, Australian Journal of Soil Research 27(3) pp. 511 – 523. 5)Dahe, P., & Borate, P., 2015. Development of erosion hotspots for Kaas Plateau (ESZ) of Western Ghat, Maharashtra using RUSLE and arc GIS. International Journal of Remote Sensing & Geoscience (IJRSG), 4(4), pp.35–43. 6)Ganasri, B.P., Hgowda, R., 2016. Assessment of soil erosion by RUSLE model using remote sensing and GIS – A case study of Nethravathi Basin, https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/geoscience-frontiers/vol/7/issue/6, pp. 953-961. 7). Laften, J.M., Lane, L.J., and Foster, G.R., 1991 WEPP: a new generation of erosion prediction technology. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 46(1): 34–38. 8)Lal R., 2001. Soil degradation by erosion. Land Degrad Dev 12(5):519–539 9)Lal, R., 1977. Analyses of factors affecting rainfall erosivity and soil credibility. In: Soil Conservation and Management in the Humid Tropics (ed. D. J. Greenland & R. Lai), Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, UK. 10)Licciardello, F., Govers, G., Cerdan, O., Kirkby, M.J., Vacca, A. and Kwaad, F.J.P.M., 2009. Evaluation of the PESERA model in two contrasting environments. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 34(5): 629–640. 11)Marker M, Angeli L, Bottai L, Costantini R, Ferrari R, Innocenti L, Sililiano G., 2007. Assessment of land degradation susceptibility by scenario analysis: A case study in Southern Tuscany, Italy. Geomorphology 93 (2008): 120-129. 12)Moore I, Burch G., 1986. Physical basis of the length-slope factor in the universal soil loss equation.Soil Sci Soc Am J 50:1294–1298 13)Nearing, M.A., 2004. Soil erosion and conservation. In Wainwright, J. and Mulligan, M. (eds.) Environmental Modelling: Finding Simplicity in Complexity. London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.,pp. 277–290. 14)Prasanna Kumar, V., Vijith, H., Abinod, S., and Geetha, N., 2012. Estimation of soil erosion risk within a small mountainous sub-watershed in Kerala, India, using Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) and geo-information technology. Geoscience Frontiers, 3(2): 209– 215

© 2025 International Journal of Engineering and Techniques (IJET).

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

IJET assigns a unique DOI to every accepted article via Zenodo for persistent linking and citation. Your article’s DOI: https://doi.org/{{doi}}

Open DOI About Zenodo DOI

Close