Comparing the Subjective and the Objective Criteria Weighting in Agricultural Water Resources Management
Volume 3, Issue 4, July 2015, Pages: 38-46
Received: Aug. 30, 2015; Accepted: Sep. 13, 2015; Published: Sep. 26, 2015
Views 4391      Downloads 114
Maryam Hafezparast, Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Razi University, Emam-Khomeini Highway, Kermanshah, Iran
Shahab Araghinejad, Department of Irrigation & Reclamation Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering & Technology, College of Agriculture & Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Tehran, Iran
Tatiana Filatova, Centre for Studies in Technology and Sustainable Development, Faculty of Management and Governance, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
Article Tools
Follow on us
In this study Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) approach is applied to the Aras basin in the North West of Iran to integrate different criteria for demand management and decision making. Coupling between the River Basin Management Model (MIKEBASIN) and Visual Basic Macro in Excel with the use of COM/.Net interface as a Decision Support System (DSS) have done to evaluate the performance of 9 indicators of structural alternatives. The Analytical Hierarchical process, Entropy method and the strategy of equal weighting are compared as three different methods of Subjective, Objective and Equal criteria weighting. The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is used for Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) analysis to determine the best management alternatives. The results show that, the alternative 'Increase water efficiency’ and ‘Decrease cultivated area’ is the most preferred option.
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), TOPSIS, Aras River Basin
To cite this article
Maryam Hafezparast, Shahab Araghinejad, Tatiana Filatova, Comparing the Subjective and the Objective Criteria Weighting in Agricultural Water Resources Management, Hydrology. Vol. 3, No. 4, 2015, pp. 38-46. doi: 10.11648/j.hyd.20150304.11
Ako, A. A., Eyong, G. E. T., & Nkeng, G. E. (2009). 'Water Resources Management and Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) in Cameroon', Journal of Water Resources Management (24): 871–888.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 1998. 'Sustainability Criteria for Water Resources Systems'. (Task Committee on Sustainability Criteria, Water Resources Planning and Management Division, ASCE and Working Group, UNESCO/IHP IV Project M-4.3). ASCE, Reston, VA.
Bressers, H. and S. Kuks (2004). Governance of Water resources. In: Integrated governance and water basin management, Bressers H. and S. Kuks [eds.], Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Christensen, F. 2004. 'Coupling between the River Basin Management Model (MIKE BASIN) and the 3D Hydrological Model (MIKE SHE) with use of the OpenMI System'. 6th International Conference on Hydroinformatics. Singapore.
Churchman, C. W., Ackoff, R. L., Arnoff, E. L., 1957. Introduction to Operations Research. John Wiley, New York.
Danish Institute of Hydrology. MIKE BASIN.2003. A versatile decision support tool for integrated water resources management and planning, DHI Water and Environment, Denmark.
Danish Institute of Hydrology. MIKE BASIN.2003. Manuals and Documentation. http:// www. dhisoftware. com/ mikebasin/ index.htm.
Densham P. J. and Goodchild M. F.1989.Spatial decision support systems: a research agenda. Proceedings of GIS/LIS'89.ACSM, Bethesda Maryland, pp.707-16.
Eckenrode, R. T. 1965. Weighting multiple criteria. Management Sc. 12, 180-192.
Hashimoto, T., Stedinger, J. R., and Loucks, D. P., 1982, Reliability, resiliency and vulnerability criteria for water resource system performance evaluation, Water Resources Research, 18(1), 14 – 20, doi: 10.1029/ WR018i001p00014.
Humberto, S. H., Ignacio, R. M. D., María Teresa, A. H.,and Alfredo, G. O., 2009. Mathematical modeling for the integrated management of water resources in hydrological basins. Water Resources Management (23): 721–730.
Hwang, C. L; Yoon, K. 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ireson, A., Makropoulos, C., Maksimovic, C., 2006. Water Resources Modeling under Data Scarcity: Coupling MIKE BASIN and ASM Groundwater Model. Journal of Water Resources Management (20):567-590.
Leemhuis, C., Jung, G., Kasei, R., Liebe, J., 2009. The Volta Basin Water Allocation System: assessing the impact of small-scale reservoir development on the water resources of the Volta basin, West Africa. Journal of Advances in Geosciences (21):57-62.
Dingfei Liu, Theodor J. Stewart. 2004. Integrated object-oriented framework for MCDM and DSS modelling. Decision Support Systems 38(3): 421-434.
Mahabghods consulting engineering. 2010. Update the State Water Plan Aras, Sefidrood, Gorganrood, Atrak, Urmia watersheds. Aras synthesis Report.
Reitsma, R. F., 1996. Structure and support of water-resources management and decision-making. Journal of Hydrology (177). Iss.3-4: 253.
Saaty, T. 1994. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Wiley, New York.
Shannon Claude, E., 1948. A Mathematical Theory of Communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27 (3): 379–423.
Tzeng, G-H., Chen, T-Y., Wang, J. C., 1998. A weight assessing method with habitual domains. European Journal of Operational Research, 110: 342-367.
UN-Water. 2008. Status Report on Integrated Water Resources Management and Water Efficiency Plans.
UN-Water. GWP. 2007. Roadmapping for Advancing Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Processes.
Yilmaz, B., Harmancioglu, N. B., 2010. An indicator based assessment for water resources management in Gediz River Basin, Turkey. Journal of Water Resources Management 24(15):4359-4379.
Water Strategy Man project, EU Contract No. EVK1-CT-2001-00098(2002-2005)
Zeeb, S., 2010. Adaptation to Climate Change in the Kura-Aras River Basin. Snapshot Draft for Discussion.
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
Tel: (001)347-983-5186