Conflicts and resolutions in managing water allocation at the watershed scale

Zorica Srdjevic; Bojan Srdjevic; Paulo Melo; Luísa Jorge

doi:10.2478/boku-2019-0014

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Conflicts and resolutions in managing water allocation at the watershed scale

Die Bodenkultur: Journal of Land Management, Food and Environment

Volume 70 (2019): Issue 3 (December 2019)

By: Zorica Srdjevic, Bojan Srdjevic, Paulo Melo and Luísa Jorge

Open Access

|Dec 2019

Figures & Tables

Regional hydro system Nadela
Abbildung 1. Das regionale Wassersystem Nadela

Methodology for integrating multi-criteria optimization with river basin simulation–optimization models
Abbildung 2. Methode zur Integration der Multi-Kriterien-Optimie-rung in Simulationsoptimierungsmodellen für Flußgebiete

A hierarchy with a goal (G), two criteria (C₁–C₂), and three alternatives (A₁–A₃)
Abbildung 3. Die Hierarchie mit Ziel (G), zwei Kriterien (C₁–C₂) und drei Alternativen (A₁–A₃)

Table 1

Priorities of water use within management strategies for the period 2016–2025 as decision alternative for water allocation

Tabelle 1. Prioritäten der Wassernutzung innerhalb der Managementstrategien für die Periode 2016–2025 als Entscheidungsalternativen für die Wasserzuteilung

Water uses category	Strategy 1	Strategy 2	Strategy 3	Strategy 4
IR – Irrigation	Top	Medium	Medium	Low
DR – Drainage	Medium	Top	Low	Medium
UW – Used waters	Low	Low	Top	Low
IS – Industrial supply	Medium	Medium	Medium	Top
OP – Other purposes	Negligible	Low	Low	Negligible

ACQUANET model for regional Nadela hydro system
Abbildung 4. ACQUANET-Modell für das regionale Wassersystem Nadela

Table 2

Weights of the strategies within one of the five subgroups

Tabelle 2. Gewichtung der Strategien innerhalb der fünf Untergruppen

	Strategy 1	Strategy 2	Strategy 3	Strategy 4
Stakeholder1	0.393	0.239	0.175	0.193
Stakeholder2	0.414	0.236	0.174	0.176
Stakeholder3	0.411	0.249	0.204	0.136
Stakeholder4	0.338	0.235	0.229	0.198
Stakeholder5	0.334	0.219	0.226	0.220
Consensus convergence weights	0.366	0.233	0.212	0.190

Table 3

Subgroups consensus weights for strategies

Tabelle 3. Konsensgewichte der Untergruppen für die Strategien

Strategy/Subgroups	Strategy 1	Strategy 2	Strategy 3	Strategy 4
Subgroup 1	0.366	0.233	0.212	0.190
Subgroup 2	0.132	0.222	0.421	0.225
Subgroup 3	0.187	0.304	0.310	0.199
Subgroup 4	0.128	0.163	0.304	0.405
Subgroup 5	0.156	0.161	0.386	0.297

Table 4

The final weights of alternative water allocation strategies

Tabelle 4. Die entgültige Gewichtugn der alternativen Wasserzuteilungsstrategien

Aggregation method	Strategy 1	Strategy 2	Strategy 3	Strategy 4
Consensus convergence	0.167 (4)	0.204 (3)	0.341 (1)	0.285 (2)

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/boku-2019-0014 | Journal eISSN: 2719-5430 (formerly 0006-5471) | Journal ISSN: 0006-5471

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English, German

Page range: 161 - 170

Submitted on: May 14, 2019

Accepted on: Aug 4, 2019

Published on: Dec 31, 2019

Published by: Universität für Bodenkultur Wien

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: Volume open

Keywords:

river basin model,

allocation scenarios,

stakeholders,

multi-criteria optimization,

consensus

Related subjects:

Life sciences,

Ecology,

Life sciences, other

© 2019 Zorica Srdjevic, Bojan Srdjevic, Paulo Melo, Luísa Jorge, published by Universität für Bodenkultur Wien
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Volume 70 (2019): Issue 3 (December 2019)

Conflicts and resolutions in managing water allocation at the watershed scale

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Table 1

Figure 4

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Paradigm

My account