Soil & Water Res., 2014, 9(4):143-152 | DOI: 10.17221/27/2014-SWR
How to reach a compromise solution on technical and non-structural flood control measuresOriginal Paper
- 1 Faculty of Environmental Sciences and
- 2 Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
Harmful impacts of floods are the result of an interaction between extreme hydrological events and environmental, social, and economic processes. Flood management should consider many diverse aspects and influences and an integrated approach to flood management therefore plays an important role. In order to make an analysis and provide an adequate flood management, it is necessary to bring together a team comprising experts e.g. from the fields of hydrology and water resources, nature protection, risk management, human security, municipal administration, economics, and land use. Estimates by experts can serve finding solutions to given YES/NO problems, and estimating the value of specific attributes or parameters. It is not easy to adopt the solution which represents the best possible agreement among the participating experts, since experts and other participants can represent diverse standpoints. In particular, landowners and leaseholders upstream a catchment are often in a different position than the members of the municipal flood control committee downstream in a city with a high inhabitancy. In order to measure and evaluate the level of agreement between experts and landowners, a newly developed method for assessing the level of agreement and the τ-agreement value was applied. The aim of the present paper is to illustrate the use of a fuzzy-group-agreement decision-making procedure of this kind, involving a broad range of standpoints in a case study of the Zdravá Voda catchment, Žarošice, Czech Republic. This illustration has been made by comparison of hydrological model scenarios with the experts' decision. The method used in the paper applied towards aggregating expert proposals expressed as fuzzy quantities to propose a binary solution to estimate a decisive parameter numerical value. The decision achieved for the Zdravá Voda catchment was that the efficiency of structural measures (polder) was superior over the non-structural measures (replacement of the arable land by grassland).
Keywords: agreement; averaging operator; consensus; environmental decision making; flood risk management; fuzzy uncertainty; multi-aspect decision
Published: December 31, 2014 Show citation
References
- Arnette A., Zobel C., Bosch D., Pease J., Metcalfe T. (2010): Stakeholder ranking of watershed goals with the vector analytic hierarchy process: Effects of participant grouping scenarios. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25: 1459-1469.
Go to original source...
- Bardossy A., Duckstein L., Bogardi J. (1993): Combination of fuzzy number representing expert opinions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 57: 173-181.
Go to original source...
- Beven K.J. (2006): Rainfall-Runoff Modelling. The Primer. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
- Brakensiek D.L., Raws W. J. (1981): An infiltration based rainfall runoff model for SCS type II distribution. In: Winter Meeting ASAE. Palmer House, Chicago.
- Chen Z., Zhao L., Lee K. (2010): Environmental risk assessment ofshore produced water discharges using a hybrid- fuzzy stochastic modelling approach. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25: 782-792.
Go to original source...
- de Roo A., Burek P., Gentile A., Udias A., Bouraoui F., Aloe A., Bianchi A., La Notte A., Kuik O., Tenreiro J.E., Vandecasteele I., Mubareka S., Baranzelli C., Van der Perk M., Lavalle C., Bidoglio G. (2012): A multi-criteria optimisation of scenarios for the protection of water resources in Europe. [Report ENR 25552 EN.] JRC Scientific and Policy Reports, JCR, Ispra.
- Ferraro D.O. (2009): Fuzzy knowledge-based model for soil condition assessment in Argentinean cropping systems. Environmental Modelling & Software, 24: 359-370.
Go to original source...
- Grabisch M., Marichal J.-L., Mesiar R., Pap E. (2011): Aggregation functions: Means. Information Sciences, 181: 1-22.
Go to original source...
- Kibler D.F., Woolhiser D.A. (1970): The kinematic cascade as a hydrologic model. Hydrology Paper No. 39, Colorado State University, New York.
- Kovář P. (1992): Possibilities to determine design discharges on small catchment using the KINFIL model. Vodohospodársky časopis, 40: 197-220. (in Czech)
- Kovar P., Svitak M. (1994): A possibility of modelling direct runoff on small catchments using geographical information systems. Zeitschrift fuer Kulturtechnik und Landentwicklung, 35: 345-357.
- Kovář P., Cudlín P., Heřman M., Zemek F., Korytář M. (2002): Analysis of flood events on small river catchments using the KINFIL model. Journal of Hydrology and Hydromechanics, 50: 157-171.
- Kovar P., Vassova D., Hrabalikova M., Vrana I. (2012): Stakeholders' consensus on technical measures. In: Klijn F., Schweckendiek T. (eds): Comprehensive Flood Risk Management. Taylor and Francis Group, London.
- Morel-Seytoux H.J. (1982): Analytical results for predictions of variable rainfall infiltration. Journal of Hydrology, 59: 209-230.
Go to original source...
- Morel-Seytoux H.J., Verdin J.P. (1981): Extension of the SCS rainfall runoff methodology for ungaged watersheds. [Report FHWA/RD-81/060.] US National Technical Information Service, Springfield.
- NRCS (2004): Hydrologic soil-cover complexes. Chapter 9. In: National Engineering Handbook, Part 630 Hydrology. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
- NRCS (2007): Hydrologic soil groups. Chapter 7. In: National Engineering Handbook, Part 630 Hydrology. US Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
- Ponce V.M., Hawkins R.H. (1996): Runoff curve number: Has it reached maturity? Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 1: 11-19.
Go to original source...
- Refsgaard J.C., van der Sluijs J.P., Højberg A.L., Vanrolleghem P.A. (2007): Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process - A framework and guidance. Environmental Modelling & Software, 22: 1543-1556.
Go to original source...
- Singh V.P. (1996): Kinematic Wave Modelling in Water Resources. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
- Soulis K.X., Valintzas J.D., Dercas N., Londra P.A. (2009): Investigation of the direct runoff generation mechanism for the analysis of the SCS-CN method applicability to a partial area experimental watershed. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 13: 605-615.
Go to original source...
- Tastle W.J., Wierman M.J. (2007): Consensus and dissention. A measure of ordinal dispersion. International Journal of Approximating Reasoning, 45: 531-545.
Go to original source...
- US SCS (1985): National Engineering Handbook, Section 4: Hydrology. US Soil Conservation Service, USDA, Washington, D.C.
- US SCS (1986): Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. US Soil Conservation Service, USDA, Washington, D.C.
- US SCS (1992): Soil Conservation Program Methodology. Chapter 6.12. Runoff Curve Numbers. US Soil Conservation Service, USDA, Washington, D.C.
- Vaníček J., Vrana I., Aly S. (2009): Fuzzy aggregation and averaging for group decision making: A generalization and survey. Knowledge-Based Systems, 22: 79-84.
Go to original source...
- Vrana I., Vaníček J., Kovář P., Brožek J., Aly S. (2012): A new fuzzy group agreement-based approach for multiexpert decision making in environmental issues. Environmental Modelling & Software, 36: 99-110.
Go to original source...
- Woodward D.E., Hawkins R.H., Jiang R., Hjemflet A.J., Van Mullem J.A., Quan Q.D. (2003): Runoff curve number method: Examination of the initial abstraction ratio. In: Proc. World Water & Environmental Resources Congr. and Related Symposia, Denver, 1-10.
Go to original source...
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.