EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MODELS FOR APPLICATION TO WATER RESOURCES PLANNING1

ABSTRACT: A research project was undertaken for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to determine the relative utility and effectiveness of four well-known multicriteria decision making (MCDM) models for applications in realistic water resources planning settings. A series of experiments was devised to examine the impact of rating and ranking procedures on the decision making behavior of users (e.g., planners, managers, analysts, etc.) when faced with situations involving multiple evaluation criteria and numerous alternative planning projects. The four MCDM models tested were MATS-PC, EXPERT CHOICE, ARIADNE, and ELECTRE. Two groups of analysts and decision makers were tested. One group consisted of experienced U.S. Army Corps planners, while the other was comprised of graduate students. Based on a series of nonparametric statistical tests, the results identified EXPERT CHOICE as the preferred MCDM model by both groups based largely on ease of use and understandability. ARIADNE fostered the largest degree of agreement within and among the two groups of individuals tested. The tests also lend support to the claim that rankings are not affected significantly by the choice of decision maker (i.e., who uses any of these MCDM models) or which of these four models is used.     

PLANNERS AS A PUBLIC IN WATER RESOURCES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAMS1

This paper suggests a number of benefits in identifying urban and regional planners as a public in public participation programs of water resources planning studies. A perspective on public participation is presented. Recent trends and developing concepts are identified: emphasis on the need to coordinate urban and regional planning activities with water resources planning, increasing system complexity, the goals and objectives orientation of planning, planning for multi-objectives, the evaluation of a broader range of alternatives, and the consideration of water alternatives as only one set of measures to further society's aspirations. One way to assist in capitalizing on these trends is to seek out participation of those in other planning efforts who are involved in planning but on a different level. Because of their intimate knowledge of an areas history, growth and development, political climate, local perceptions of needs and desires, and major problems and issues they are able to contribute a great deal of insight in making the water resources planning effort more responsive at the local level. The paper describes one of the first major efforts at working-level public-planner contact which was carried out as part of the Susquehanna River Basin Study. A regional survey team comprised of an engineer and an economist from a federal agency and a state water resources planner met informally with planners, city managers, and local planning commissions to discuss issues related to water resources and the growth and development of local areas. This effort while only part of the overall public participation program yielded a number of benefits and if expanded and refined would be a very useful experience in other studies.     

WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST1

ABSTRACT. The water resources manager, concerned with providing for citizen needs for water in all its varied aspects, is obliged to consider the public interest in his decision making. But the public interest, although inferring the superiority of public over purely private interests, is more of a concept of political ethics than an operational objective. Recent attacks on water resources developments place in question just how responsive the water resources manager has been to the public at large during the planning process. The recent broadening of planning objectives beyond economic efficiency to include greater attention to social goals is an encouraging development. Efforts should be expanded toward greater citizen participation and more attention should be given to sampling surveys to determine citizen attitudes on water resources proposals. In the last analysis, the decision-making process must combine the expertise of the water resources manager and the participation of the people through the political process.     

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS IN WATER RESOURCES PLANNING1

Historically, the main objective of water resources development has been economic efficiency, and the technique for its evaluation has been benefit-cost analysis. Gradually other objectives have emerged, and these in order of their emergence are regional income redistribution, environmental quality and social well-being. These multi-objectives have given rise to multifarious problems, and have made the planning process much more complex than ever before. The different objectives are not mutually exclusive, and, hence, contributions to one can only be made at the expense of others. Trade-off studies between different objectives are difficult to make. It is suggested that one way to overcome this difficulty could be to design a system to perform optimally in terms of one objective, subject to a specified level of performance of the other, which in effect becomes a constraint. The paper also discusses the pros and cons of the desirability of public participation in our decision-making processes, and the necessity of developing social sciences models to aid water planning and management.     

SOCIAL FEASIBILITY AS AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO WATER RESOURCE PLANNING1

ABSTRACT: Research suggests that conflict over public participation in water resource planning is due, in part, to confusion over the nature of the policies involved. This article examines the roadblocks to citizen involvement in water resource planning in terms of two policy models: (1) the Social Feasibility Model and (2) the Political Feasibility Model. Each model posits a different role for public participation. Although the Political Feasibility Model has been widely accepted in water resource planning, changes in the nature of the policies involved in water resource management have weakened its appropriateness. Currently, social and redistributive policies involving value conflicts often dominate water planning and these policies are best chosen through the Social Feasibility Model. The article discusses the nature of the social feasibility model, the new types of policy decisions facing water resource managers, and how the social feasibility model can help overcome the roadblocks to increased public participation in water resource policy making.     

Nonstationary Water Planning: An Overview of Several Promising Planning Methods1

Waage, Marc D. and Laurna Kaatz, 2011. Nonstationary Water Planning: An Overview of Several Promising Planning Methods. Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) 47(3):535‐540. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752‐1688.2011.00547.x Abstract: Climate change is challenging the way water utilities plan for the future. Observed warming and climate model projections now call into question the stability of future water quantity and quality. As water utilities cope with preparing for the large range of possible changes in climate and the resulting impacts on their water systems, many are searching for planning techniques to help them consider multiple possible conditions to better prepare for a different, more uncertain, future. Many utilities need these techniques because they cannot afford to delay significant decisions while waiting for scientific improvements to narrow the range of potential climate change impacts. Several promising methods are being tested in water utility planning and presented here for other water utilities to consider. The methods include traditional scenario planning, classic decision making, robust decision making, real options, and portfolio planning. Unfortunately, for utilities vulnerable to climate change impacts, there is no one‐size‐fits‐all planning solution. Every planning process must be tailored to the needs and capabilities of the individual utility.