Multicriterion Selection of Wastewater Management Alternatives

Tecle, Aregai; Fogel, Martin M.; Duckstein, Lucien

doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9496(1988)114:4(383)

Cited by 67 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A-5 Raju and Pillai (1999) Selecting a reservoir configuration for a river basin EII P AHP, CP, EXPROM II, PRM II, SRC Ranking alternative strategies for managing irrigation systems ETRI, EIII, EIV P, P, P CP, EXPROM II, PRM II, SRC Raju and Duckstein (2004) Ranking water resources planning strategies for an irrigation area EIII P KRC, Cluster analysis Rodrigues et al (2011) Analyzing a proposed expansion of a water supply system EI P GIS, SAW, TPS Prioritizing water users and selecting a water supply system EIII P PREFCALC Same as in EIII P Shafike et al (1992) Selecting a strategy for a groundwater contamination management problem EII P CP, MCQA-II, ECM Sharifi and Rodriguez (2002) Evaluating the impacts of different policies for water resource rehabilitation Ceccato et al (2011) Identifying and ranking of strategies for handling EIII P RSP, Borda rule 13 See also discussion paper by Riel and Leblanc (1989) and closure paper by Tecle and Duckstein (1990) A C C E P T E D…”

Section: A N U S C R I P Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications

Govindan

Jepsen

2016

European Journal of Operational Research

476

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: A N U S C R I P Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications

Govindan

Jepsen

2016

European Journal of Operational Research

476

177

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Since then, several attempts have been made to address WWT technology selection problems using various MCDM methods (Tecle et al 1988;Tecle and Duckstein 1990;Tang and Ellis 1994;Zeng et al 2007;Kalbar et al 2013Kalbar et al , 2015. In the field of WWT, Tecle et al (1988) were the first to apply MCDM approach to the selection of WWT alternatives. The study made use of three MCDM methods, namely, compromise programming (CP), cooperative game theory (CGT) and ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité (ELECTRE-I, i.e.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hybrid life cycle assessment based fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach for evaluation and selection of an appropriate municipal wastewater treatment technology

Kamble

Singh

Kharat

2017

Euro-Mediterr J Environ Integr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) has become a main area of research for dealing with complex environmental decision-making problems. In this paper, a hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) based fuzzy MCDM methodology is developed for the evaluation and selection of appropriate municipal wastewater treatment (WTT) technology based on expert opinion and questionnaires. Further, the study also aims to identify the key evaluation criteria in the process of selecting WTT from a sustainability perspective. The use of fuzzy MCDM in wastewater management has the advantage of rendering subjective and implicit decision-making more objective and analytical, with its ability to accommodate both qualitative and quantitative data. This study provides a systematic approach towards WWT technology selection, in which four-phase procedure is proposed. First, the appropriate technology evaluation and selection criteria were derived from the literature, LCA and experts' opinion. Next, in the second stage, the fuzzy Delphi method was used to evaluate and screen the critical factors for the evaluation of technology alternatives by interviewing the experts. Twelve criteria including sustainability and those derived from LCA and life cycle costing were obtained consisting of both qualitative and quantitative criteria. In the third stage, the weights of the selection criteria as the measurable indices of the WWT technologies were determined by fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices of analytic hierarchy process. Finally, the fuzzy the technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution technique was used for ranking the alternatives. The six most commonly used WWT technologies, viz. sequencing batch reactors (SBR), membrane bioreactor (MBR), moving bed bio-film reactor (MBBR), soil biotechnology, facultative aerated lagoon and activated sludge process were evaluated. The present study is the first study of its kind to develop a hybrid LCA-based fuzzy MCDM methodology for the selection of best WWT alternatives. Results illustrated that advanced technologies, MBR, SBR and MBBR are the preferred options with MBR the most preferred one followed by SBR and MBBR. The developed technology assessment framework enables decision makers to understand the complete evaluation and selection process better and provide a more accurate, effective, and systematic decision support framework. The framework is superior to existing methods since it has the capability of representing vague qualitative data and presenting all possible results with different degrees of membership. The framework developed and applied in this work will help identify appropriate WWT technologies for various decision-making situations faced while managing wastewaters.

show abstract

“…Gershon et al (1982) dealt with multi-objective optimization of river basin planning. MCDM approach was employed to select a best wastewater management alternative by Tecle et al (1988). Simonovic (1989) formulated a MCDM model for ranking national water master plans in Canada.…”

Section: Mcdm Approaches In Water Resources Alternative Rankingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fuzzy TOPSIS Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Applied to Karun Reservoirs System

Afshar

Mariňo

Saadatpour

2010

Water Resour Manage

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water resource systems, with an abundance of project purposes and resource values, are subject to conflicting policy, planning, and management decisions. Multi-criteria decision making methods (MCDM) provide a framework to help water managers identify critical issues, attach relative priorities to those issues, select best compromise alternatives, and facilitate communication to gain general acceptance. This paper addresses a method that incorporates several system factors/components within a general framework for providing a holistic analysis of the problems and comprehensive evaluation of the related mitigation/adaptation measures and policy responses. The method accounts for uncertainties in both the quantification and importance of objectives in the ranking process. The proposed fuzzy multi-criteria decision making process uses the well known Technique for Order Preference by Similarity of Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method in both deterministic and uncertain environments. The performance of the proposed approach to a real water resource management problem in Iran is illustrated. Results show that the model may be used in a large-scale multi-level assessment process. Ranks of the alternatives are presented using deterministic and fuzzy based models.

show abstract

Multicriterion Selection of Wastewater Management Alternatives

Cited by 67 publications

References 11 publications

ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications

ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications

A hybrid life cycle assessment based fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach for evaluation and selection of an appropriate municipal wastewater treatment technology

Fuzzy TOPSIS Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Applied to Karun Reservoirs System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About