Modeling Earth Systems and Environment

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-023-01845-9

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Mapping of current and future soil erosion risk in a semi-arid context

(haouz plain - Marrakech) based on CMIP6 climate models, the
analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and RUSLE
Youssef Bammou1 · Brahim Benzougagh2 · Abdelkrim Bensaid3 · Brahim Igmoullan1 ·
Ayad M. Fadhil Al-Quraishi4

Received: 19 January 2023 / Accepted: 15 July 2023

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023

Abstract Water erosion of soils is increased by global warming and has a detrimental effect on natural resources. The situa-
tion is worse in the High Atlas, where a combination of natural and human forces accelerate erosion and reduce the income
of local families. In this work, we assessed the existing erosion of the Haouz plain and projected water erosion of the soils
into the future. The survey was conducted in three stages. In the first step, we estimated the annual erosion rate of the Haouz
plain from 1992 to 2020 using the Revised Universal Soil Equation (RUSLE), publicly available data and the most recent
land observations. The efficiency of the multi-criteria analysis method, taking into account how the second step’s water ero-
sion is affected by the five RUSLE equation parameters. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to determine a weight
for each criterion. Using new erosion parameters and the projected erosivity of precipitation from the sixteenth phase of the
Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) models, the third stage involved predicting soil water erosion in 2040.
According to the results, the average annual soil erosion rate of the Haouz plain is currently 3.53 t ha-1 y-1. According
to our predictions, the Haouz Plain will experience an increase in erosion to 4.41 t ha-1 y-1 and 5.31 t ha-1y-1 by 2040,
respectively, under the circumstances indicated by RCP2.6 and RCP8.5. Policy makers seeking to adopt environmentally
sound measures to halt the depletion of soil and water resources in semi-arid environments could use the current assess-
ment and future predictions of soil water erosion in the Haouz Plain as a basis for data.
Graphical abstract

Highlights
● A mapping of the current soil water erosion risk in the Haouz plain was predicted.
● The effects of climate change were integrated into the prediction of the R factor in 2040.

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

13

● Water erosion in 2040 could potentially increase from current rates with rates ranging from 24.90 to 50.40%.
Keywords Climate change · Water erosion · Future erosion · AHP · RULE · Haouz plain
Introduction
A very complicated phenomena that results in irreparable
losses and jeopardizes the long-term viability of productive
soils is soil water erosion. Sediments from water erosion
outside of agricultural regions have a number of significant
effects on human activities (Pimentel 2006). As a result, the
entire society is impacted (Van Zijl 2019). Because of this,
the issue of erosion is not just one of the environment or
technology, but also one of infrastructure and human safety,
socioeconomics, drinking water, and agriculture.
Because soil is a significant repository of one of the
greenhouse gases, CO2, soil erosion is a crucial mecha-
nism for understanding changes in climate change. Climate
change accelerates as a result of soil deterioration. On the
other hand, extreme weather conditions, such as torrential
rains and heat waves that mostly impact semi-arid regions,
particularly mountainous locations, would hasten the dete-
rioration of the soil (Simonneaux et al. 2015).
Globally, regions with an average annual precipitation-
to-evapotranspiration ratio (P/ETP) between 0.20 and 0.75
are considered semi-arid (Dietz 2004). While supporting
a substantial share of the world’s population, these condi-
tions restrict socioeconomic progress. Additionally, there
are several hazardous phenomena that naturally occur in
these regions but are worsened by human activity, such as
soil erosion. Soil erosion rates for the world’s regions are
as follows, according Benavidez et al. (2018): Averaging
between 30 and 40 t ha− 1 year− 1 in Asia, South America,
and Africa, compared to 17 t ha− 1 year− 1 in the United
States and Europe.
Due to a combination of geological, human, and climatic
variables, water erosion continues to be the most significant
cause of soil deterioration in Morocco. A sizable portion of
Moroccan land is affected by this occurrence, particularly
in hilly regions (Elaloui et al. 2015). Morocco has recently
undertaken a program of mobilizing surface water through
the building of dams. Morocco now has 149 active dams
with a 19 billion m3 storage capacity, but by 2020, the coun-
try will likely face a 20 billion m3 rise in water demand
(Gourfi et al. 2018). The issue of siltation, however, reduces
the lifespan and storage capacity of the dams. The situa-
tion is significantly worse in the Central High Atlas, where
the lithology is brittle, the slopes are extremely steep, and
the frequent stormy weather increases the degree of erosion.
Recent assessments in this region have revealed consider-
able rates of soil erosion (Elaloui et al. 2015; Meliho et al.
13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
2016; El Jazouli et al. 2017). In the Lakhdar watershed,
where small farmers’ operations depend on isolated agricul-
tural plots that are very susceptible to degradation causes,
the situation is especially dire.
Assessment of soil erosion takes into account the intri-
cate interactions of several elements, including climate,
land cover, terrain, and human activity (Pan and Wen 2014).
Predicting and mapping the sensitivity to water erosion in
mountainous environments might benefit from a variety of
techniques and strategies. These techniques may be divided
into two categories: direct measurements and indirect mea-
sures. In the first category, there are experimental methods
based on measurements of soil erosion features and simula-
tions of precipitation using experimental soil erosion plots
(cf. Sheridan et al. 2008 and Seutloali and Beckedahl 2015).
However, these methods are costly and spatially limited,
which makes it difficult to generalise the results obtained
(Rahman et al. 2009). The second approaches are mainly
based on modelling. Thus, the Universal Soil Loss Equation
(USLE) is one of the most widely used methods (Bagarello
et al. 2017), as well as the Modified Universal Soil Loss
Equation (Chandramohan et al. 2015).These techniques
are regarded as conventional, nevertheless, since they give
every aspect of the phenomena the same amount of weight.
As a result, multi-criteria analysis can be a potent strategy
that aids in both immediate and long-term decision mak-
ing (Cristóbal 2011). These computation-based approaches
may effectively identify desirable results in line with deci-
sion makers’ needs and help them navigate uncertainty by
using a set of criteria to select the best solution (Gul et al.
2017). The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique
was used in this study to weight each element according to
how much it contributed to soil erosion. Previous studies
have supported the value of using GIS technologies in con-
junction with multicriteria analysis to analyze and monitor
soil erosion susceptibility (Haidara et al. 2019; Jaiswal et
al. 2015; Rahman et al. 2009; Vulević & Dragović 2017;
Benzougagh et al. 2022). The goal is to locate regions where
soil erosion is likely to occur and to comprehend the erosive
processes and variables that influence this phenomenon.
However, if precipitation fluctuates over time, the sensitive
locations could alter. By analyzing the regional and tempo-
ral evolution of soil vulnerability in a semi-arid region, this
study seeks to solve this issue. To reconstruct the historical
history of soil vulnerability and forecast its future by 2040,
a variety of techniques are being applied, including GIS,
remote sensing, and modeling.
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
These are the study’s goals: (i) to establish a spatial map-
ping of water erosion using a combination of the RUSLE
equation and the multi-criteria analysis (MCA) method in
a semi-arid environment over a period of about 28 years,
(ii) to understand the relationship between climate, soil
water erosion and climate change in the Haouz plain. This
study could serve as a resource for policy makers seeking to
implement natural therapies to reduce soil and water losses
in arid and semi-arid environments.
Study area
The Haouz plain spans an area of 7215 km2 and is located
between the Atlas range, which has a peak elevation of
4165 m (Toubkal), in the south, and the Jbilet range, in the
north (with little relief with a maximum of 1061 m). It is con-
strained in the west by the Mzoudia chains and collides with
the first Middle Atlas slopes in the east. These latter define
the basin of Mejjate, which is bounded by the basin of Ess-
aouira Chichaoua, west of Haouz (Piqué et al. 2007). The
Haouz of Marrakech is a depression that is 40 km broad and
more than 150 km long from east to west. It can be divided
into three sections: the eastern Haouz, which spans an area
of 1657 km2 between River Lakhdar and River R’dat; the
central Haouz, which spans an area of 3180 km2 between
River R’dat and River Nfis; and the western Haouz, also
known as Mejjat, which spans an area of 2378 km2 between
River Nfis and the edge of the Essaouira.
The weather stations located throughout the Haouz—
Marrakech, Tahanout, Aghbalou, Sidi Rahal, Tafériat, Imine
Fig. 1 Geographical location of the Haouz plain
El Hammam, Lalla Takerkoust Dam, Sidi Hssain, Sidi
Bouothmane, Chichaoua, and Abadla—display informa-
tion on the climate. The Haouz plain has a continental dry
to semi-arid climate with little to no rainfall and significant
temporal and regional variation. The Aghbalou station (alti-
tude: 985 m) in the High Atlas (Ourika watershed) reported
an average rainfall of roughly 527 mm/year from 1962 to
2015, compared to 184 mm/year at the Marrakech station
on the plain (Fig. 1).
Materials and methods
The RUSLE equation combined with multi-criteria analysis
method is used in this study to predict current soil water
erosion. It stands on parameters that are obtained from
several remote sensing data sets. The current value of the
R-factor was modeled using simple linear regression under
1992–2020 climate conditions. We generalized this model
using future climate data from five GCMs (CNRM-CM6-1,
EC-Earth3-veg, HadGEM-GC3I-LL, IPSL-CM6A-LR,
and MPI-ESMI-2-LR) to predict the R-factor in 2040. Pre-
cipitation erosivity and other erosion parameters from the
RUSLE equation were then used to predict potential soil
loss in 2040. Here is how we describe our methods (Fig. 2):
RUSLE model
RUSLE represents according to Eq. 1, is an empirical model
most widely applied to quantify soil water erosion (Renard
et al. 1997), it is appropriate for predicting erosion rates.
13

Fig. 2 Methodology for estimating current and future water erosion using the RUSLE approach
A = R ∗ K ∗ LS ∗ C ∗ P (1)
Where, A = mean annual soil loss (t/ha/year); R = rainfall
erosivity factor (MJ.mm/ ha.H.year); K = soil erodibility
factor (t.ha.h/ha.MJ.mm); LS = topographical factor slope
length and slope (L in m, S in %); C = the cover manage-
ment factor (dimensionless) and P = conservation practice
factor (dimensionless).
The R factor serves as a predictor of the likelihood that
precipitation will fragment and move soil particles. In this
research, monthly rainfall data observed through 9 rainfall
stations available on the Haouz plain, for the 28-year period
from 1992 to 2020, the Tensift Hydraulic Basin Agency’s
(ABHT) data were used in our R computation.Rango &
Arnoldus’ methodology was used to compute the R factor
(1987). A linear regression method was used to see the cor-
relation between the precipitation of the climate stations and
the R-factor to be expected in 2040.
 P i2
Log(R) = 1.74log + 1.29 (2)
P
13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
Where:
● pi: monthly rainfall (mm);
● p: annual rainfall (mm);
● R: rainfall erosivity factor (MJ.mm/ ha.H.year).
Data on soil texture and soil organic carbon can be used to
estimate the soil erodibility factor, K. (Sharpley and Wil-
liams 1990). In this study, the soil type map was extracted
from the Digital Soil Map of the World (DSMW), (Fig. 3;
Table 1). Published by the Food and Agriculture Organiza-
tion of the United Nations (FAO, 2007) and the K-factor
is estimated using the equation (Eq. 3) of Williams (2000).
K = fcsand ∗ fcl − si ∗ forgc ∗ fhisand ∗ 0.1317 (3)
Where, ƒcsand: fraction of soils with high coarse sand con-
tent (Eq. 4); ƒcl-si: fraction of soils with high silt/clay ratio
(Eq. 5); ƒorgc: fraction of soils with high organic carbon
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment

Fig. 3 Fig 3 Evolution of

precipitation-by-precipitation
erosivity factor (R) from 1992 to
2020 for the 9 climate stations in
the study area.

Table 1 Soil code, K-values, and the computation of ƒcsand, ƒcl-si, ƒorgC and ƒhisand of the Williams (2000) in study area
Soil Code ms (sand) msilt (silt) mc (clay) orgC ora- Fcsand F cl-si F orgc F hisand K usle K
Top soil % Top soil % Topsoil)% ganic carbon
%
Xk10-2a 48,7 29,9 21,6 0,64 0,20005 0,8495 0,9768 0,9993 0,1659 0,021846
Bk10-2b 81,6 6,8 11,7 0,44 0,20000 0,7406 0,9906 0,7185 0,1054 0,013885
Re5-b 68,3 15,1 16,6 0,5 0,20000 0,8005 0,9874 0,9634 0,1523 0,020059
Xk4-2a 47,7 30,9 22,6 0,65 0,20006 0,8482 0,9758 0,9994 0,1655 0,021795
Jc13-2a 39,6 39,9 20,6 0,65 0,20068 0,8826 0,9758 0,9999 0,1728 0,022760
IL-Re-2c 58,9 16,2 24,9 0,97 0,20000 0,7563 0,9272 0,9942 0,1394 0,018364

13
 Modeling Earth Systems and Environment

Table 2 Value and area in (Ha) of C factors for the different land cover types considered
Area (Ha)
Gride LU/LC 1992 2002 2020 Factor C Source
1 Hydrographic network + 5125,70 5933,96 6413,02 0,18 Ganasri and Ramesh (1990)
Eroded area Hurni (1995)
2 Build up-land 4452,12 5749,75 8204,63 0,09 Meshesha et al. (2012)
3 Bare soil 636095,20 614697,30 520042,00 0,05
4 Agricultural land and 75584,27 94046,26 153924,30 0,35
vegetation

Table 3 Percent area (Ha) and P-factor values suggested by Wischmeier and Smith (1978)
Area (Ha)
Type of Land-use Slope (percent) 1992 2002 2020 Factor P Source
Agricultural land 0–5 62260,7 74556,7 121,509 0,10 Wischmeier and Smith (1978)
5–10 11088,9 15644,9 25552,2 0,12 Bewket and Teferi (2009)
10–20 2025,82 3423,85 6014,92 0,14 Ganasri and Ramesh (2016)
20–30 156,488 321,99 647,358 0,19
30–50 37,427 72,31 146,564 0,25
50–100 0,193088 1,51489 3,84236 0,33
Another land All 645,332 626,063 534,414 1

Table 4 The relative importance of the factors and their numerical

expression based on the Saaty scale (Saaty 1980) ● mslit: Percent silt content (0.002–0.05 mm)
AHP Scale of Importance for Numeric Reciprocal ● mc: Percent clay content (< 0.002 m)
comparison pair (aij) Rating (decimal) ● orgC: Percent organic carbon content of the layer (%).
Extreme Importance 9 1/9 (0.111)
Very strong to extremely 8 1/8 (0.125) The percentage of sand content (ms), percentage of silt con-
Very strong Importance 7 1/7 (0.143) tent (msilt), percentage of clay content (mc) and percentage
Strongly to to very strong 6 6 1/6 (0.167)
of organic carbon content (orgC) are collected from the gen-
Strong Importance 5 1/5 (0.200)
eralized soil unit information report included with the soil
Moderately to Strong 4 1/4 (0.250)
type map published by FAO. The soil unit information and
Moderate Importance 3 1/3 (0.333)
Equally to Moderately 2 1/2 (0.500)
the computation of the ƒcsand, ƒcl-si, ƒorgC and ƒhisand for
Equal Importance 1 1 (1.000) each type of soil of the study area are presented in Table 5.
Table 5: Soil types, K-values, and the computation of
ƒcsand, ƒcl-si, ƒorgC and ƒhisand of the Williams (2000)
content (Eq. 6); ƒhisand: fraction of soils with extremely in study area.
high sand content (Eq. 7): The slope length and slope steepness effects on soil loss
are represented by the LS factor. In this study, the LS factor
fcsand = 0.2 + 0.3e−0.256.ms.(1− 100 ) 
msilt
(3a) distributed in the field was calculated using the contribu-
tory surface unit method. Using a tool in the hydrologic
 0.3
msilt modeling extension of the ArcGIS Spatial Analyst tools, the
fcl − si =  (3b) flux accumulation was extracted from the dataset (DEM) at
mc + msilt
30 m resolution. Moore and Burch (1986); Panagos et al.
0.0256.orgC (2015) and Brahim et al. 2020 provided the method to cal-
forgc = 1 −  (3c) culate the LS factor as (Eq. 4):
orgC + e(3.72−2.95.orgC)
 0.4  1.3
  cell size sin (slope)
ms
0.7. 1 − 100 LS = Flow accumulation × ∗  (4)
fhisand = 1 −  22.13 0.0896
 ms  (3d)
ms
1 − 100 + e−5.51+22.9.(1− 100 )
Factor C details the impact of vegetation, management, and
Where: erosion control techniques on soil loss (Wischmeier and
Smith 1978; Mengistu et al. 2015). Factor C is most strongly
● ms: Percent sand content (0.05-2.0 mm diameter influenced by changes in soil cover, which also results in a
particles) significant increase in soil loss. This factor is derived from

13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment

Table 5 Pairwise comparison matrix and Normalized weights of factors in the RUSLE equation for AHP; λmax, RI and CR
Matrix R Factor P Factor LS Factor K Factor C Factor Normalized Weight
R Factor 1 4 9 2 3 0.436052376
P Factor 1/4 1 3 1/2 4 0.178202357
LS Factor 1/9 1/3 1 1/3 1/4 0.047983647
K Factor 1/2 2 3 1 3 0.233594795
C Factor 1/3 1/4 4 1/3 1 0.104166825

Eigenvalue Lambda: 5,413 MRE: 45,6%

Consistency Ratio 0.37 GCI: 0.34 Psi: 10.0% CR: 9.2%

the normalized difference vegetation index and supervised examining matrices with a consistency ratio greater than
classification of a Landsat 8 OLI scene, taken in (2020-09- 0.10.
11), Table 2 shows C-factor value associated with each land The likelihood of incorrectly evaluating options increases
use class. with the consistency ratio’s value. The following equation
The supporting practice factor P, to calculate the P fac- (Eq. 5) was used to determine the consistency ratio (CR):
tors, the research area was divided into agricultural and other
land use groups recommended by Wischmeier and Smith CI
CR =  (5)
(1978). As shown in Table 3, agricultural land was divided RI
into six different slope classes, with each class receiving a P
value, while all other land uses received a value of 1. Where:

Relative weights of the factors of the RUSLE ● CR: Consistency Ratio;

equation
The weights of the factors of the RUSLE equation applied
in the Haouz plain were determined using the AHP method
developed by (Saaty, 1991). A mathematical technique
called the AHP method is used to describe complicated
issues with a variable number of components. A pairwise
comparison matrix is created to enable comparison of factor
ratings once all factors have been arranged hierarchically. A
pairwise comparison matrix is created to allow comparison
of factor ratings once all factors have been ranked hierar-
chically. Five numerical scales were used to determine the
importance of each factor, as shown in the accompanying
table (Table 4).
The individual grids of water erosion conditioning crite-
ria were categorized into five classes, with the categoriza-
tion into intervals based on the quantile approach, in order
to better compare the criteria. demonstrating susceptibility
to deterioration (5: very high, 4: high, 3: moderate, 2: low
and 1: very low). The reclassification was done based on the
eroded areas of the land. Water erosion conditioning criteria
were selected based on the RUSLE equation in a 5 × 5 recip-
rocal square matrix in Table 5.
Calculating the consistency of the paired evaluations was
a crucial step in the AHP-based study. It is recommended
that consistency be measured using a consistency ratio
(CR), which defines the probability that the assessments in
the matrix are randomly generated. Saaty (1980) suggests
● CI: Consistency Index;
● RI: Random Index.
The consistency index (CI) of a randomly generated pair-
wise comparison matrix (IR) and dependent on the number
of factors (criteria) being compared represents the consis-
tency index of the comparison matrix (Saaty 1980).
Equation was used to determine the consistency index.
(Eq. 6):
λmax − n
CI =  (6)
n−1
Where:
● n is the number of criteria (factors);
● λ is the average value of the consistency vector, as sug-
gested by Saaty (1980).
We then calculated the current (1992–2020) soil water ero-
sion in the Haouz plain after calculating all components and
their appropriate weights for RUSLE (Eq. 1).
Future soil erosion predictions using spatial
modeling
Between 1992 and 2020, we created a linear regression
between our current R-value and the climatic variable (pre-
cipitation), which was collected from the ABHT database

13
 Modeling Earth Systems and Environment

Fig. 4 RUSLE Factor Maps (a)

slope length and slope steepness,
LS factor; (b) support practice,
P factor; (c) soil erodibility, K
factor; (d) cover management, C
factor; and (e) rainfall erosivity,
R factor

Table 6 List of the five CMIP6
from MCGs and their reporting
institutions and countries, and
horizontal resolutions of grid
increments
Model Model Name Modeling Center/Nation Horizontal
Number Resolution
(lat. x lon.)
1 CNRM-CM6- 1 Centre National de Recherches Météorologique- 1.4° x 1.4°
Centre Européen de Recherche et de Formation
Avancée en Calcul Sientifique/France
2 EC-EC-Earth3-veg EC-EARTH consortiun/ Europe 0.7° x 0.7°
3 HadGEM-GC3I-LL Met Office Hadley Centre/UK 1.25° x 1.875°
4 IPSL-CM6A-LR l’Institut Pierre-Simon Laplace/France 1.26° x 2.5°
5 MPI-ESMI-2-LR Max Planck Institue for Meteorology/Germany 1.875° x
1.875°

(Fig. 4). In this study the five GCM scenarios for the year
2040 were used to produce future R-value estimates. The
five scenarios obtained from the WorldClim data portal
(http://www.worldclim.org/), were used to represent the
future climate factor in the Haouz plain. The results of the
estimation of R-factor values according to the two extreme
representative concentration pathways (RCP); RCP8.5 and
RCP2.6 from CMIP6 were used (Table 6). The estimated
R-factor for 2040 and other erosion parameters (K, LS, P,
and C), which were inadvertently influenced by climate
change in this study, were used to calculate the final estima-
tions of soil water erosion in 2040.
Results and discussion
Current rate of soil water erosion based on AHP
In order to analyze the factors in the RUSLE (Revised
Universal Soil Loss Equation) soil loss equation, pairwise
comparisons were conducted using a 5 × 5 reciprocal square
matrix. The normalized weights of the factors, along with
the corresponding values, are illustrated in Fig. 5. Among the
factors, the R factor exhibited the highest weight (wi) with a
value of 0.436. The weights assigned to the other variables
were as follows: factor K (wi = 0.233), factor P (wi = 0.178),

13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
factor C (wi = 0.104), and factor LS (wi = 0.047) (refer to
Fig. 6).
The coherence of the matrix assessments was ensured
by satisfying the coherence criteria, which was further
supported by the coherence ratio determined in this study,
measuring 0.092. By utilizing equation (Eq. 7), the reclas-
sified water erosion conditioning factors were multiplied by
their respective weights to calculate the weighted total. This
AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process)-based approach was
employed to generate a water erosion susceptibility map.

WE(AHP) = wi x i 
Where:
● WE (AHP) is the water erosion susceptibility based on
AHP,
● wi is the weight of factor i and.
● xi is the reclassified classes of each factor i.
Figure 5 displays the maps of the RUSLE factors on the
Haouz plain. Figure 5e displays the projected map of the
yearly R factor for the Haouz plain at a spatial resolution of
30 m.The reduced R values range from 5.70 to 48.70 MJ.
mm/ ha.H.year, with an annual average of 27.21 MJ.mm/
Fig. 5 Annual water erosion map of current modeled soil (1992–2020)
ha.H.year. The lowest R values (< 5 MJ.mm/ ha.H.year)
were observed mainly in the Western and Central Haouz
especially in the southern part. The highest R value (> 35 MJ.
mm/ ha.H.year) was observed in the Eastern Haouz in the
areas of Ourika to Haouz plain, which corresponds to the
strong precipitation is irregular in the High Atlas Mountains
of Marrakech.
The values of the K factor is presented by a map in
Fig. 5c vary from 0.0139 to 0.0227 t.ha.h/ha.MJ.mm, with
an average value of K in the Haouz plain was 0.0183 t ha
h ha-1 MJ-1 mm-1. They show that the least erodible soils
(7) (K values < 0.014 t.ha.h/ha.MJ.mm) are found mainly in
the south of the area with predominantly Paleozoic schis-
tose soil and predominantly Paleozoic limestone rocks. The
most erodible soils (K values > 0.028 t.ha.h/ha.MJ.mm) are
found mainly to the north and west where there are deposits
of Quaternary and Tertiary age.
Figure 5a shows the map of the LS factor. On the Haouz
plain, The LS factor had an average value of 0.99. In the
lowest parts of the Haouz plain, the LS factor had the lowest
value (> 0.2), while the highest value of LS factor (> 1.97)
occurred in the foothills of the High Atlas Mountains. The
high values of the LS factor coincide with the escarpments
and the high, rugged topography of of Lalla Takarkoust
13

Fig. 6 (a) Maps of the precipitation erosion factor for 2040 under sev-
eral climatic scenarios and realistic concentration paths (RCP). First:
CNRM-CM6-1 (RCP2.6, 8.5). Second line: EC-Earth3-veg (RCP2.6,
8.5). Third line: HadGEM-GC3I-LL (RCP2.6, 8.5). Fourth line: IPSL-
CM6A-LR (RCP2.6, 8.5). Fifth line: MPI-ESMI-2-LR (RCP2.6,
8.5) Unit: MJ.mm/ ha.H.year. (b) Potential soil loss maps by climate
and the landforms of Ouirgane and Amghras, making these
areas highly susceptible to water erosion.
The map of the C factor is presented in Fig. 5d. The high-
est C values were found in the central and eastern Haouz,
in the eastern part of the Tassaout region, and in areas with
high density of vegetation cover, while the lowest C values
were observed in the western part of the study area, in the
western Haouz, where it is located in bare soil and distinct
vegetation cover.
As can be seen in Fig. 5d, the map of the P factor shows a
decrease in soil erosion related to anthropomorphic impacts.
Human engineering activities in the Haouz plain are rare
and mostly limited to agricultural land, which was mainly
used to outure the river areas of the Haouz plain, including
all kinds of cultivation areas.
The final RUSLE map of the Haouz plain’s yearly rate
of soil water erosion is displayed in Fig. 6. 3.53 t/ha/year of
soil were lost on average. The greatest erosion was visible
in the east, north, and center of the plain.
13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
scenarios and exemplary concentration trajectories for 2040 (RCP).
First line: CNRM-CM6-1 (RCP2.6, 8.5). Second line: EC-Earth3-veg
(RCP2.6, 8.5). Third line: HadGEM-GC3I-LL (RCP2.6, 8.5). Fourth
line: IPSL-CM6A-LR (RCP2.6, 8.5). Fifth line: MPI-ESMI-2-LR
(RCP2.6, 8.5). Unit: t/ha/year
The sensitivity map to water erosion established on the
basis of ABHT data including climatic conditions of precip-
itation since 1992 to the current and historical 2020. Shows
that the areas of erosion degree (low) represent the largest
proportion of the total erosion area and are mainly in the
Haouz plain, while the areas of erosion degree (high to very
high) represent the smallest proportion of the total erosion
area of the study area and are mainly in the foothills of the
High Atlas and around the Tensift River (Fig. 6).
On a national scale in Morocco, other watersheds have
been studied for the risk of water erosion, with varying
degrees of soil loss across different regions. In the north-
western Rif region, the Kalaya and Oued Sania watersheds
have average erosion rates of 34.74 t/ha/year (Khali Issa
et al. 2016) and 47.18 t/ha/year (Tahiri et al., 2014, 2017)
respectively. The Oued Boussouab watershed in the eastern
Rif and the Oued Salha watershed in the central Rif show
soil losses of approximately 55.53 t/ha/year (Sadiki et al.
2004) and 22 t/ha/year (Sadiki et al. 2009) respectively.
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
In the Gharb region, the Sebou watershed, which covers
more than 70% of its area, exhibits a soil loss of 10 t/ha/
year (Chadli 2016). In the Middle Atlas, the Oum Er-Rbia
watershed has variable erosion rates according to different
authors, ranging from 58 t/ha/year (El Jazouli et al. 2019) to
224 t/ha/year (Yjjou et al. 2014). In the N’fis watershed in
the western High Atlas, the erosion rate is estimated at 115
t/ha/year (Markhi et al., 2015; 2019). Finally, in the Oued
Inaouène watershed in the Pre-Rif region, the erosion rate
is estimated at 36.33 t/ha/year (Benzougagh et al., 2020;
2023).
Potential for future soil loss in the Haouz plain
The predictive linear regression model of the R-factor
value shows an accuracy of 0.80. The results show that soil
water erosion will occur primarily over the entire northern
Fig. 7 (a) Change in precipitation erosivity factor for 2040 under
climate scenarios and representative concentration pathways (RCP).
First line: CNRM-CM6-1 (RCP2.6, 8.5). Second line: EC-Earth3-
veg (RCP2.6, 8.5). Third line: HadGEM- GC3I-LL (RCP2.6, 8.5).
Fourth line: IPSL-CM6A-LR (RCP2.6, 8.5). Fifth line: MPI-ESMI-
2-LR (RCP2.6, 8.5). Purple areas represent decreases and green areas
represent increases in the value of precipitation erosivity relative to
the current value. Unit: (MJ.mm/ ha.H.year) (b) Change in potential
(Fig. 7b), eastern, and central part of the Haouz plain.
According to five GCMs and two RCPs, the maps of the
anticipated R-factor and associated soil water erosion in
2040 reveal that the high R-value in 2040 occurs mostly in
the northern half of the study region in the foothills of the
High Atlas. The eastern Haouz is where the five GCMs and
the two RCPs shown in Figure (Fig. 7a) differ the most in
terms of the R-factor in 2040.
In 2040 the R-factor predicted by the EC-Earth3-veg
climate scenario, showed an increase in the eastern Haouz
plain, while that predicted by the HadGEM-GC3I-LL,
IPSL-CM6A-LR, MPI-ESMI-2-LR, and CNRM-CM6- 1
climate scenarios showed a decreasing trend in most areas
of the Haouz plain (Fig. 3a). According to our projections,
the southern portion of the plateau’s overall erosion rates
will rise in 2040 under the EC-Earth3-veg and CNRM-
CM6-1 climate scenarios, whereas projections utilizing the
soil loss for 2040 under climate scenarios and representative con-
centration pathways (RCP). CNRM-CM6-1 (RCP2.6, 8.5). Second
line: EC-Earth3-veg (RCP2.6, 8.5). Third line: HadGEM-GC3I-LL
(RCP2.6, 8.5). Fourth line: IPSL-CM6A-LR (RCP2.6, 8.5). Fifth line:
MPI-ESMI-2-LR (RCP2.6, 8.5). In relation to the existing value, blue
regions indicate prospective soil loss reductions, while red areas indi-
cate potential soil loss rises. Unit: (t/ha/year)
13

HadGEM-GC3I-LL, IPSL-CM6A-LR, and MPI-ESMI-
2-LR climate scenarios show a decline in these regions in
2040. (Fig. 3b). According to the climatic projections, there
would be a general rise in erosion rates in the western Haouz
by 2040.
Figure 8 shows the current estimated eroded area in Km2
on the Haouz plain and our 2040 forecast. According to
RCP2.6 and RCP8.5, the average value of the five GCMs
was predicted to be 4.41 and 5.31 t ha-1 year-1, respectively,
in 2040. The Haouz plain presented an annual soil loss area
of about 1489.51 Km2 and 2186.18 Km2 in 2040 according
to RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 respectively.
There have been few quantitative reports of water erosion
in the Haouz plain, and no studies have predicted the danger
of future soil erosion in the study region. The Haouz plain
may see more soil and land degradation as a result of the
changing climatic circumstances, which makes the research
we provide here on current soil water erosion and its future
forecast timely. Soil water erosion on the Haouz plain in
this study is based on the RUSLE equation in combination
with the AHP method. Compared to earlier research, our
estimates of soil water erosion are more accurate, by inte-
grating the AHP method to show the impact of each factor
including the RUSLE equation. The R-factor in this study
was calculated on the basis of monthly precipitation data.
Our findings showed that areas with shrub forest and sparse
woodland had low rates of erosion. This discovery, mean-
while, contradicted the findings of other studies. Modeste
Meliho and others (2020).
Particularly if the RCP8.5 scenario comes to pass, which
corresponds to the pathway with the greatest climatic vari-
ability and the largest greenhouse gas emissions, Western
Haouz seems to be a more exposed and vulnerable region
to climate change in 2040. This is based on the prediction
of future soil water erosion in the Haouz plain using five
regional climate models. High and unpredictable precipita-
tion has a significant impact on this region’s bare soil.
The rise in temperature and precipitation are directly tied
to changes in runoff in the Haouz plain. The danger of future
erosion in 2040 is indicated by the rising trend in total soil
Fig. 8 Current and future (2040) water erosion rate evolution classes
according to the two scenarios, RCP2.6 and RCP8.5.
13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
runoff under the RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 scenarios. Increased
soil water erosion might have an impact on agricultural
operations in the research region.
Future forecasts were made using two emission scenarios
that are among the lowest and greatest ranges of all pos-
sible warming scenarios. The precise amount of warming
that will take place in the study region is yet unknown. In
various areas of the Haouz plain, the five GCM predictions
for soil erosion show divergent trajectories. The five GCMs’
predictions of soil water erosion exhibit varying patterns
in various places, which is reflected in the high degree of
uncertainty of the soil erosion predictions. We made an
effort to minimize model bias by using five GCMs and two
scenarios. The projection models and scenarios we utilized,
in our opinion, offer a suitable threshold for soil erosion in
2040.
Conclusion
Semi-arid regions are particularly vulnerable to the effects
of climate change. In order to help decision makers and
managers develop policies for its preservation and protec-
tion, it is crucial to understand its effects and consequences
on land degradation in the Haouz plain.
Using a combination of the multicriteria analysis
approach and RUSLE, this study developed estimations of
present water erosion based on a rainfall record supplied by
ABHT from 1992 to 2020 in the Haouz plain, based on the
most readily accessible and up-to-date data sets. In order
to forecast the value of the erosion factor R and the water
erosion in 2040, linear regression was used to compute the
erosion factor R.
The Haouz plain, which has an area of 371.28 Km2, has
an average soil erosion rate of 3.53 t/ha/year, according to
the findings. The eastern Haouz, the oueds of the plain, and
the foothills of the High Atlas are where there is the most
severe soil erosion.
The five future climate models and the two RCPs’ pre-
dictions for soil water erosion point to an increase in that
year 2040. Under the RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 models, the
average soil water erosion was 4.41 and 5.31 t/ha/year,
with projected soil loss areas of 1489.51 and 2186.18 Km2,
respectively. The Eastern Haouz and the Northern Haouz
were where the variations in erosion rates were found, per
RCP2.6 and RCP8.5.
References
Bagarello V, Stefano C, Di, Ferro V, Pampalone V (2017) Catena Pre-
dicting maximum annual values of event soil loss by USLE-type
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
models. CATENA 155:10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
catena.2017.03.002
Benavidez R, Jackson B, Maxwell D, Norton K (2018) A review of
the (revised) Universal Soil loss equation ((R) USLE): with a
view to increasing its global applicability and improving soil loss
estimates. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 22(11):6059–6086. https://doi.
org/10.5194/hess-22-6059-2018
Benzougagh, B., Meshram, S. G., Abdallah, D., Larbi, B., Drisss, S.,
Khalid, M., & Khedher, K. M. (2020).Mapping of soil sensitivity
to water erosion by RUSLE model: case of the Inaouene water-
shed (NortheastMorocco). Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 13,
1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-020-06079-y
Benzougagh B, Meshram SG, Dridri A, Boudad L, Baamar B, Sad-
kaoui D, Khedher KM (2022) Identification of critical water-
shed at risk of soil erosion using morphometric and geographic
information system analysis. Appl Water Sci 12:1–20. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s13201-021-01532-z
Benzougagh, B., Meshram, S. G., Fellah, B. E., Mastere, M., El Basri,
M., Ouchen, I., ... & Turyasingura, B.(2023). Mapping of land
degradation using spectral angle mapper approach (SAM): the
case of Inaouenewatershed (Northeast Morocco). Modeling
Earth Systems and Environment, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s40808-023-01711-8
Bewket, W., & Teferi, E. (2009). Assessment of soil erosion hazard
and prioritization for treatment at the watershed level: case study
in the Chemoga watershed, Blue Nile basin, Ethiopia. Land deg-
radation & development, 20(6),609–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/
ldr.944
Brahim B, Meshram SG, Abdallah D, Larbi B, Drisss S, Khalid M,
Khedher KM (2020) Mapping of soil sensitivity to water ero-
sion by RUSLE model: case of the Inaouene watershed (North-
east Morocco). Arab J Geosci 13:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12517-020-06079-y
Chadli K (2016) Estimation of soil loss using RUSLE model for Sebou
watershed (Morocco). Model Earth Syst Environ 2:1–10. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s40808-016-0105-y
Chandramohan T, Venkatesh B, Balchand AN (2015) Evalua-
tion of three soil Erosion models for small watersheds. Aquat
Procedia 4(Icwrcoe):1227–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
aqpro.2015.02.156
Cristóbal JRS (2011) Multi-criteria decision-making in the selec-
tion of a renewable energy project in spain: the Vikor method.
Renewable Energy 36(2):498–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2010.07.031
Dietz T, Millar D, Dittoh S, Obeng F, Ofori-Sarpong E (2004) Cli-
mate and livelihood change in North East Ghana. The Impact
of Climate Change on Drylands January 2004https://doi.
org/10.1007/1-4020-2158-5
El Jazouli A, Barakat A, Ghafiri A, El Moutaki S, Ettaqy A, Khellouk
R (2017) Soil erosion modeled with USLE, GIS, and remote sens-
ing: a case study of Ikkour watershed in Middle Atlas (Morocco).
Geoscience Lett 4(1):1–12
El Jazouli A, Barakat A, Khellouk R, Rais J, Baghdadi E, M (2019)
Remote sensing and GIS techniques for prediction of land use
land cover change effects on soil erosion in the high basin of the
Oum Er Rbia River (Morocco). Remote Sens Applications: Soc
Environ 13:361–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2018.12.004
Elaloui A, Marrakchi C, Fekri A, Maimouni S, Aradi M (2015) Mise
en place d’un modèle qualitatif pour la cartographie des zones à
risque d’érosion hydrique dans la chaîne atlasique: Cas du bassin
versant de la Tessaoute amont. (Haut Atlas Central, Maroc).
European Scientific Journal, 11(29)
Ganasri, B. P., Ramesh, H. (2016). Assessment of soil erosion by
RUSLE model using remote sensing and GISA case study of
Nethravathi Basin. Geoscience Frontiers, 7(6), 953–961. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2015.10.007
Gourfi A, Daoudi L, Shi Z (2018) The assessment of soil erosion risk,
sediment yield and their controlling factors on a large scale:
Example of Morocco. J Afr Earth Sc 147:281–299. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2018.06.028
Gul M, Celik E, Gumus AT, Guneri AF (2017) A fuzzy logic based pro-
methee method for material selection problems. Beni-Suef Univ J
Basic Appl Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjbas.2017.07.002
Haidara I, Tahri M, Maanan M, Hakdaoui M (2019) Efficiency of
fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy process to detect soil erosion vul-
nerability. Geoderma 354:113853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
geoderma.2019.07.011
Hurni, H. (1985). An ecosystem approach to soil conservation. Soil
erosion and conservation, 73, 759–771.
Issa LK, Lech-Hab KBH, Raissouni A, Arrim E, A (2016) Cartogra-
phie quantitative du risque d’erosion des sols par approche SIG/
USLE au niveau du bassin versant Kalaya (Maroc Nord Occiden-
tal). J Mater Environ Sci 7(8):2778–2795
Jaiswal RK, Ghosh NC, Galkate RV, Thomas T (2015) Multi cri-
teria decision analysis (MCDA) for watershed. Aquat Pro-
cedia 4(Icwrcoe):1553–1560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
aqpro.2015.02.201
Markhi, A., Laftouhi, N. E., Soulaimani, A., & Fniguire, F. (2015).
Quantification et evaluation de l’1erosion hydriqueen utilisant le
modèle RUSLE et dépositions intégrées dans un SIG. Applica-
tion dans le bassin versant N'fis dansle haut atlas de Marrakech
(Maroc). European Scientific Journal, 11(29).
Markhi A, Laftouhi N, Grusson Y, Soulaimani A (2019) Assessment
of potential soil erosion and sediment yield in the semi-arid N′ fis
basin (high Atlas, Morocco) using the SWAT model. Acta Geo-
phys 67:263–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-019-00251-z
Meliho M, Khattabi A, Mhammdi N, Hongming Z (2016) Cartogra-
phie Des Risques De L’erosion Hydrique Par L’equation Univer-
selle Revisee Des Pertes En Sols, La Teledetection Et Les Sig
Dans Le Bassin Versant De L’ourika (Haut Atlas, Morocco). Eur
Scientifc J November 2016 edition(vol12):227–297. https://doi.
org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n32p277
Meliho, M., Khattabi, A., & Mhammdi, N. (2020). Spatial assess-
ment of soil erosion risk by integrating remotesensing and
GIS techniques: a case of Tensift watershed in Morocco. Envi-
ronmental Earth Sciences, 79, 1–19.https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12665-020-08955-y
Mengistu D, Bewket W, Lal R (2015) Soil erosion hazard under the cur-
rent and potential climate change induced loss of soil organic matter
in the upper Blue Nile (Abay) River Basin, Ethiopia Reaearch-
Gate. 137–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09360-4_7
Meshesha, D. T., Tsunekawa, A., & Tsubo, M. (2012). Continuing
land degradation: cause–effect in Ethiopia’s Central Rift Valley.
Land degradation & development, 23(2), 13–143. https://doi.
org/10.1002/ldr.1061
Moore ID, Burch GJ (1986) Physical basis of the length-slope factor
in the universal soil loss equation Soil. Sci Soc Am J 50(5):1294–
1298. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1986.036159950050000500
42x
Pan J, Wen Y (2014) Estimation of soil erosion using RUSLE in Caiji-
amiao watershed, China. Nat Hazards 71:2187–2205. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11069-013-1006-2
Panagos P, Borrelli P, Meusburger K (2015) A new European slope
length and steepness factor (LS-Factor) for modeling soil ero-
sion by water. Geosciences, 5 (2) (2015), pp. 117–126 https://doi.
org/10.3390/geosciences5020117
Pimentel D (2006) Soil erosion: a food and environmental threat.
Environ Dev 610 Sustain 8(1):119–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10668-005-1262-8
Piqué A, Soulaimani A, Hoepffner C (2007) Géologie du Maroc,
Geode. Imprimerie El Watanya, Marrakesh, Morocco
13

Rahman MR, Shi ZH, Chongfa C (2009) Soil erosion hazard evalu-
ation—An integrated use of remote sensing, GIS and statistical
approaches with biophysical parameters towards management
strategies. Ecol Model 220(13–14):1724–1734. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.04.0
Rango A, Arnoldus HMJ (1987) Aménagement des bassins versants.
In: Cahiers techniques de la FAO: 1–11
Renard KG, Foster GR, Weesies GA, McCool DK, Yoder DC (1997)
Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to conservation planning
with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Agricul-
ture Handbook No. 703. USAD-ARS, Washington
Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). J Oper Res
Soc 41(11):1073–1076
Saaty TL, Vargas LG (1991) Prediction, projection and forecasting:
applications of the analytic hierarchy process in economics,
finance, politics, games and sports. Springer
Sadiki A, Bouhlassa S, Auajjar J et al (2004) Utilisation d’un SIG pour
l’évaluation et la cartographie des risques d’érosion par l’Equation
universelle des pertes en sol dans le Rif oriental (Maroc): Cas du
bassin versant de l’oued Boussouab, vol 26. Bulletin de l’Institut
Scientifique, Rabat, section Sciences de la Terre, pp 69–79
Sadiki A, Faleh A, Zêzere JL, Mastass H (2009) Quantification de
l’Erosion en nappes dans le Bassin Versant de l’Oued Sahla-Rif
Central Maroc. Cahiers géographiques 6:59–70
Seutloali KE, Beckedahl HR (2015) Understanding the factors influ-
encing rill erosion on roadcuts in the south eastern region of
South Africa. Solid Earth 6(2):633–641. https://doi.org/10.5194/
se-6-633-2015
Sharpley AN, Williams JR (1990) EPIC – EPIC–Erosion/Productiv-
ity Impact Calculator: 1. Model documentation. USDA Technical
Bulletin No. 1768, Washington, DC
Sheridan GJ, Noske PJ, Lane PN, Sherwin CB (2008) Using rain-
fall simulation and site measurements to predict annual interrill
erodibility and phosphorus generation rates from unsealed forest
roads: validation against in-situ erosion measurements. CATENA
73(1):49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2007.08.006
Simonneaux V, Cheggour A, Deschamps C, Mouillot F, Cerdan
O, Le Y (2015) Land use and climate change effects on soil
erosion in a semi-arid mountainous watershed (high Atlas,
Authors and Affiliations
Youssef Bammou1 · Brahim Benzougagh2 · Abdelkrim Bensaid3 · Brahim Igmoullan1 · Ayad M. Fadhil Al-Quraishi4
Youssef Bammou
youssef.bammou@ced.uca.ma
Brahim Benzougagh
brahim.benzougagh@is.um5.ac.ma; benzougaghbrahim@
gmail.com
Abdelkrim Bensaid
abdelkrim.bensaid@univ-orleans.fr
Brahim Igmoullan
igmoullan@gmail.com
Ayad M. Fadhil Al-Quraishi
ayad.alquraishi@gmail.com
13
Modeling Earth Systems and Environment
Morocco). J Arid Environ 122:64–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaridenv.2015.06.002
Tahiri M, Achab M, Emran A et al (2014a) Lithology Data Contri-
bution in Hydrographic Network distribution using remote sens-
ing and GIS: case of the Tahaddart Basin, Northwestern Rif,
Morocco. Int J Adv Res 2:380–391
Tahiri M, Tabyaoui H, El Hammichi F, Achab M, Tahiri A, Hadi E, H
(2017) Quantification de l’érosion hydrique et de la sédimentation
à partir de modèles empiriques dans le bassin versant de tahaddart
(Rif nord occidental, Maroc), vol 39. Bulletin de l’Institut Scien-
tifique, Rabat, Section Sciences de la Terre, pp 87–101
Van Zijl G (2019) Digital soil mapping approaches to address real
world problems in southern 650 Africa. Geoderma 337:1301–
1308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.07.052
Vulević T, Dragović N (2017) Multi-criteria decision analysis for
sub-watersheds ranking via the PROMETHEE method. Int
Soil Water Conserv Res 5(1):50–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
iswcr.2017.01.003
Williams, J. D., Wilkins, D. E., Douglas Jr, C. L., & Rickman, R. W.
(2000). Mow-plow crop residue managementinfluence on soil
erosion in north-central Oregon. Soil and Tillage Research, 55(1–
2), 7–78.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(00)00100-8
Wischmeier WH, Smith DD (1978) Predicting rainfall erosion losses:
a guide to conservation planning. Department of Agriculture, Sci-
ence and Education Administration
Yjjou M, Bouabid R, El Hmaidi A, Essahlaoui A, Abassi E, M (2014)
Modélisation de l’érosion hydrique via les SIG et l’équation uni-
verselle des pertes en sol au niveau du bassin versant de l’Oum
Er-Rbia. Int J Eng Sci (IJES) 3(8):83–91
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.
1
Department of Geology, Faculty of Science and Technology,
Laboratory of Geo-Resources, Geo-Environment and Civil
Engineering (L3G), Cadi Ayad University, Marrakech,
Morocco
2
Department of Geomorphology and Geomatics, Scientific
Institute, Mohammed V University in Rabat, Avenue Ibn
Battouta, P.B 703, Agdal, Rabat‑City 10106, Morocco
3
Department of Geography, Laboratory Center of Studies
for the Development of Territories and the Environment
(CEDETE), University of Orléans, UFR LLSH, Orléans,
France
4
Petroleum and Mining Engineering Department, Tishk
International University, Erbil, Iraq