Systems Analysis – a new paradigm and decision support tools for the water framework directive

Abstract

Abstract. In the early days of Systems Analysis the focus was on providing tools for optimisation, modelling and simulation for use by experts. Now there is a recognition of the need to develop and disseminate tools to assist in making decisions, negotiating compromises and communicating preferences that can easily be used by stakeholders without the need for specialist training. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires public participation and thus provides a strong incentive for progress in this direction. This paper places the new paradigm in the context of the classical one and discusses some of the new approaches which can be used in the implementation of the WFD. These include multicriteria decision support methods suitable for environmental problems, adaptive management, cognitive mapping, social learning and cooperative design and group decision-making. Concordance methods (such as ELECTRE) and the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) are identified as multi-criteria methods that can be readily integrated into Decision Support Systems (DSS) that deal with complex environmental issues with very many criteria, some of which are qualitative. The expanding use of the new paradigm provides an opportunity to observe and learn from the interaction of stakeholders with the new technology and to assess its effectiveness.

A systematic decision support system to objectively evaluate retrospective energy efficiency modelling options

“…Thus, choosing a Section 12L model that adheres to multiple legal and technical requirements is a multi-criteria decision problem. A generic method of solving multi-criteria decision problems was therefore investigated from various literature (Azar, 2000;Bruen, 2008;Mateo, 2012;Tzeng et al, 2005;Volkart et al, 2017). The identified steps are to:…”

“…Extensive research was done in various relevant fields to identify the criteria that Section 12L models need to adhere to. These research areas include, industrial energy efficiencies (Bergh, 2012;Hasanbeigi, et al, 2012;Morrow, et al, 2013;Schutte, 2013;Worrel & Galitsky, 2005); Section 12L Regulations and Standard (Du Toit, 2011; National Treasury, 2013; Republic of South Africa, 2013; Republic of South Africa, 2015); industrial measurement and verification (Booysen, 2014;Campbell et al, 2017;Hamer et al, 2017;Janse Van Rensburg, 2015;SABS, 2017); and decision support methods (Bruen, 2008;Kolios et al, 2016;Mateo, 2012;Saaty, 2008). This produced the following list of evaluation criteria to assess Section 12L models:…”

Soft systems methodology and integrated flood management: a study of the Adayar watershed, Chennai, India

“…It allows one to determine the relative order (ranking) of the criteria involved in the process using pairwise comparison matrix (de Steiguer et al . ; Bruen ). In this study, the criteria listed in Table are the major reasons for the flooding problem.…”

Hydrology and the Water Framework Directive in Ireland

“…Since the RBD teams are required to propose measures to address water and ecological issues, they must have tools to simulate the effect of every proposed measure for use in a decisionsupport framework (Irvine et al 2005;Bruen 2008). Given the time frame involved, numerical models are the tools of choice.…”