Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Drinking Water Source Selection in Southwestern Bangladesh

Peters, Chelsea N.; Baroud, Hiba; Hornberger, George M.

doi:10.1061/(asce)wr.1943-5452.0001029

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Harvesting rainwater is cheap and easy but storing it for a longer period of time is a challenge. RWH scored significantly better than pond for risk, attitude, and habit and scored significantly higher than STW for risk and attitude (Table 5), suggesting there is great potential for RWH to be adopted by both pond and STW users, as was also found by a previous study [44]. However, it is only available cheaply in the wet season, July to October.…”

Section: Rainwater Harvesting (Rwh)supporting

confidence: 62%

Why Do People Remain Attached to Unsafe Drinking Water Options? Quantitative Evidence from Southwestern Bangladesh

Naus

Burer

Laerhoven

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acceptance of newly implemented, safe drinking water options is not guaranteed. In the Khulna and Satkhira districts, Bangladesh, pond water is pathogen-contaminated, while groundwater from shallow tubewells may be arsenic-or saline-contaminated. This study aims to determine why, as well as the extent to which, people are expected to remain attached to using these unsafe water options, compared to the following four safer drinking water options: deep tubewells, pond sand filters, vendor water, and rainwater harvesting. Through 262 surveys, this study explores whether five explanatory factors (risk, attitude, norms, reliability, and habit) pose barriers to switching from unsafe to safe drinking water options or whether they could act as facilitators of such a switch. Users' attachment to using pond water is generally low (facilitators: risk and attitude. Barrier: norms). Users are more attached to shallow tubewells (no facilitators. Barriers: reliability and habit). The safe alternatives (deep tubewell, rain water harvesting, pond sand filter, and vendor water) score significantly better than pond water and are estimated to have the potential to be adopted by pond water users. Deep tubewell, rain water harvesting, and pond sand filter also score better than shallow tubewells and could also have the potential to replace them. These findings may be used to optimise implementation strategies for safer drinking water alternatives.

show abstract

Section: Rainwater Harvesting (Rwh)supporting

confidence: 62%

Why Do People Remain Attached to Unsafe Drinking Water Options? Quantitative Evidence from Southwestern Bangladesh

Naus

Burer

Laerhoven

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…MAR was found to be the least preferred alternative compared to these other options by locals, nongovernmental organizations, and environmental science academics (Peters et al 2019;Nizame et al 2020). Most notably, Peters et al (2019) indicate that MAR scores low for the social criteria, due to misunderstanding concerning ownership and responsibility of maintenance, which indicates the importance of evaluating and tackling these social issues before new MAR systems are implemented. Additionally, this reveals that, whenever the other main options can feasibly provide good quality water, they are likely a better option than MAR; however, as discussed in the methods, there are areas where these options currently cannot provide good quality water year-round.…”

Section: Local Alternative Water Optionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Rainwater is generally accepted to be of good quality (Peters et al 2019;Naus et al 2020). It can be collected everywhere in the region; however, the seasonality of rainfall causes it to only be temporally available (Benneyworth et al 2016;Chowdhury 2010;Peters et al 2019;Sharma et al 2010). Consequently, most people who use rainwater in the monsoon season resort to a different option in the dry season such as pond water (Naus et al 2020).…”

Section: Assessment Of the Social Necessity For Marmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the main water options in the region (rainwater, pond water, groundwater) were considered, it should be noted that MAR was found to still experience competition of these main water options: the more main options people have available, the less interested they are in MAR (Hasan et al 2019). MAR was found to be the least preferred alternative compared to these other options by locals, nongovernmental organizations, and environmental science academics (Peters et al 2019;Nizame et al 2020). Most notably, Peters et al (2019) indicate that MAR scores low for the social criteria, due to misunderstanding concerning ownership and responsibility of maintenance, which indicates the importance of evaluating and tackling these social issues before new MAR systems are implemented.…”

Section: Local Alternative Water Optionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While recovery of freshwater was achieved at 11 sites, recovery efficiencies ranged from 5 to 40%, and arsenic concentrations in recovered water was >50 μg/L at six sites (Sultana et al 2015). Further, it is simplistic to assume that MAR is necessary throughout southwestern Bangladesh (Peters et al 2019;Naus et al 2020). People may prefer the drinking water options already available (like rainwater harvesting, pond sand filters, and tube wells) rather than new MAR systems, even though the existing options have some limitations (they are not always available throughout the year or throughout the region).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Potential for managed aquifer recharge in southwestern Bangladesh based on social necessity and technical suitability

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In southwestern Bangladesh, clean drinking water is scarce, since rainwater is only available during the monsoon, pond water is often bacteriologically polluted, and groundwater may exhibit high salinity and arsenic levels. Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) might potentially provide safe drinking water by storing abundant freshwater from the wet season in aquifers for year-round use. Regional potential for MAR was determined by combining assessments of (1) social necessity for MAR by mapping areas with insufficient drinking water of acceptable quality; (2) regional technical suitability by determining the (a) impact of density-driven flow on freshwater recovery efficiency, and (b) vulnerability of recovered water to mixing with contaminated groundwater. These assessments were based on the largest groundwater quality dataset compiled to date in southwestern Bangladesh, which contains 3,716 salinity and 827 arsenic measurements. The results show there is some mismatch between social necessity and technical suitability. In some northern areas, necessity is low because good quality groundwater is present and hence, despite the high technical suitability, potential for MAR is reduced. In other northern areas, groundwater with unsafe arsenic levels or brackish groundwater is likely used for drinking. There, MAR is a technically suitable and safer option. In southern areas, where saline groundwater is widespread and people consume bacterially unsafe pond water, the high groundwater salinity calls for careful evaluation of MAR design, for which this study presents practical guidelines. The approach developed may be useful for mapping MAR potential based on social necessity and technical suitability in other saline deltas worldwide.

show abstract

Evaluation of Groundwater Quality in the Mineralized Fields by Analytical Hierarchy Process‐Based Water Quality Index

Yılmazer

Kavurmaci

2021

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, an epithermal goldfields‐water quality index (EGF‐WQI) and the associated classification system have been proposed to define drinking water quality of the water resources in regions where epithermal gold mineralization exists. In this context, two hydrogeochemical data sets from 15 water resources are used. EGF‐WQI is designed using 21 different criteria under 4 main groups and 15 alternatives. To determine the importance and efficiency values of the criteria, analytical hierarchy method (AHP) is used. The water quality classification system is defined by 4 different categories, namely, “very good,” “good,” “acceptable,” and “inappropriate.” In order to ensure consistency of the findings, efficiency scores of the AHP method are compared with the results obtained from the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution and data envelopment analysis models. The index results obtained from AHP processes are converted into water quality distribution maps by using the Kriging interpolation method. EGF‐WQI results are observed to be compatible with the water quality standards developed by organizations such as the World Health Organization and Turkish Standards. EGF‐WQI can be used as a reliable and valid index to evaluate the water resources in regions where alteration and mineralization are present.

show abstract

Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Drinking Water Source Selection in Southwestern Bangladesh

Cited by 22 publications

References 55 publications

Why Do People Remain Attached to Unsafe Drinking Water Options? Quantitative Evidence from Southwestern Bangladesh

Why Do People Remain Attached to Unsafe Drinking Water Options? Quantitative Evidence from Southwestern Bangladesh

Potential for managed aquifer recharge in southwestern Bangladesh based on social necessity and technical suitability

Evaluation of Groundwater Quality in the Mineralized Fields by Analytical Hierarchy Process‐Based Water Quality Index

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About