Joint stakeholder decision-making on the management of the Silao-Romita aquifer using AHP

Environmental Modelling and Software

Volumn 51, Issue , 2014, Pages 310-322

  Delgado Galvan X ^a   Izquierdo, J ^b   Benitez J ^b   Perez Garcia R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUANAJUATO   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Analytic hierarchy process; Aquifer management; Decision making; Participatory modeling

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP); AQUIFER MANAGEMENT; CURRENT SITUATION; ECONOMIC RESOURCES; MANAGEMENT MODEL; MANAGEMENT OPTIONS; OVEREXPLOITATION; PARTICIPATORY MODELING;

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; AQUIFERS; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; GROUNDWATER POLLUTION; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL TECHNIQUES; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

PROBLEM SOLVING;

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; AQUIFER POLLUTION; DECISION MAKING; GUIDELINE; HOLISTIC APPROACH; LAW ENFORCEMENT; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; PRIORITIZATION; STAKEHOLDER; TRADE-OFF; WATER MANAGEMENT;

GUANAJUATO; MEXICO [NORTH AMERICA]; SILAO-ROMITA AQUIFER;

EID: 84887820933     PISSN: 13648152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Awasthi A., Chauhan S.S. Using AHP and Dempster-Shafer theory for evaluating sustainable transport solutions. Env. Model. Softw. 2011, 26(6):787-796.
2. Aznar J., Guijarro F. Nuevos métodos de valoración. Modelos multicriterio 2008, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, España.
3. Beierle T.C. The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Anal. 2002, 22:739-749.
4. Benítez J., Delgado-Galván X., Izquierdo J., Pérez-García R. Achieving matrix consistency in AHP through linearization. Appl. Math. Model. 2011, 35:4449-4457.
5. Benítez J., Delgado-Galván X., Gutiérrez J.A., Izquierdo J. Balancing consistency and expert judgment in AHP. Math. Comp. Model. 2011, 54:1785-1790.
6. Benítez J., Izquierdo J., Pérez-García R., Ramos-Martínez E. Asimple formula to find the closest consistent matrix to a reciprocal matrix. App. Math. Model. 2013, (submitted for publication).
7. Benítez J., Delgado-Galván X., Izquierdo J., Pérez-García R. Consistent completion of incomplete judgments in decision making using AHP. Appl. Math. Comp. 2013, (submitted for publication).
8. Bennett N.D., Croke B.F.W., Guariso G., Guillaume J.H.A., Hamilton S.H., Jakeman A.J., Marsili-Libelli S., Newham L.T.H., Norton J.P., Perrin Ch., Pierce S.A., Robson B., Seppelt R., Voinov A.A., Fath B.D., Andreassian V. Characterising performance of environmental models. Env. Model. Softw. 2013, 40:1-20.
9. Bojórquez-Tapia L.A., de la Cueva H., Díaz S., Melgarejo D., Alcantar G., Solares M.J., Grobet G., Cruz-Bello G. Environmental conflicts and nature reserves: redesigning Sierra San Pedro Martir National Park, Mexico. Biol. Conserv. 2004, 117:111-126.
10. Bottero M., Comino E., Riggio V. Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and the Analytic Network Process for the assessment of different wastewater treatment systems. Env. Model. Softw. 2011, 26(10):1211-1224.
11. Burton P., Goodlad R., Croft J., Abbott J., Hastings A., Macdonald G., Slater T. What Works in Community Involvement in Area-Based Initiatives? A Systematic Review of the Literature 2004, University of Bristol and University of Glasgow, London.
12. Castelletti A., Soncini-Sessa R. Aprocedural approach to strengthening integration and participation in water resource planning. Env. Model. Softw. 2006, 21:1455-1470.
13. CCLCH Consejo de Cuenca Lerma-Chapala. Reglas Generales de Integración, Organización y Funcionamiento del Consejo de Cuenca Lerma Chapala. November, 2010 2010, http://www.lermachapala.org/.
14. CEAG Manejo integral y sustentable de acuíferos. Academic Meeting UG-CEAG, April 19th, 2012 2012, Guanajuato, México.
15. CEASG Estudio hidrogeológico y modelo matemático del acuífero Silao-Romita. México. Hydrogeological Study and Mathematical Model of the Aquifer of the Valley of Silao-Romita, Gto 1998, Performed by Lesser Y Asociados S.a.
16. Ceccato L., Giannini V., Giupponi C. AParticipatory Approach to Assess the Effectiveness of Responses to Cope with Flood Risk 2010, Nota di lavoro, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei. http://hdl.handle.net/10419/43503.
17. CONAGUA Programa Nacional Hídrico 2007-2012 2008, (México).
18. CONAGUA Estadísticas del agua en México 2011, (México).
19. Delden H., Seppelt R., White R., Jakeman A.J. Amethodology for the design and development of integrated models for policy support. Env. Model. Softw. 2011, 26(3):266-279.
20. Delgado-Galván X., Izquierdo J., Benítez J., Pérez-García R., Martínez J. Action prioritization to address the Silao-Romita aquifer problem through the analytic hierarchy method. Proc. of the iEMSs Sixth Biennial Meeting. Leipzig (Germany) 2012, 1544-1551. R. Seppelt, A.A. Voinov, S. Lange, D. Bankamp (Eds.).
21. Delgado-Galván X., Izquierdo J., Martínez J., Martínez J., Morales R., Martínez A. Análisis de la problemática del acuífero Silao-Romita. Proc. of XXV Congreso Latinoamericano de Hidráulica, San José, Costa Rica 2012.
22. Demeritt D., Dyer S., Millington J.D.A. Pest or Panacea? Science, Democracy, and the Promise of Public Participation 2009, Environment, Politics and Development Working Paper Series Department of Geography, King's College London, Paper #10.
23. Dong Y., Xu Y., Li H., Dai M. Acomparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2008, 186:229-242.
24. European Commission Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Off. J. OJ 2000, L 327. (European Commission, Brussels, Belgium).
25. Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgorr M. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys 2005, Springer, New York.
26. Fischer F. Citizens, Experts and the Environment. THe Politics of Local Knowledge 2000, Duke University Press, London.
27. Forman E., Peniwati K. Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1998, 108:165-169.
28. Foster S., Garduño H., Kemper K. México - los COTAS: Avances en la gestión participativa del agua subterránea en Guanajuato 2004, Colección de casos esquemáticos, caso 10, Banco Mundial-programa asociado de la GWP.
29. Foster S., Garduño H. Gestión apropiada. El recurso hídrico subterráneo en América Latina. Lecciones exp. int. Rev. Aqua-LAC 2009, 1(1).
30. Gao L., Hailu A. Ranking management strategies with complex outcomes: an AHP-fuzzy evaluation of recreational fishing using an integrated agent-based model of a coral reef ecosystem. Env. Model. Softw. 2012, 31:3-18.
31. Giupponi C. Decision support systems for implementing the European water framework Directive: the MULINO approach. Env. Model. Softw. 2007, 22(2):248-258.
32. Giupponi C., Sgobbi A., Mysiak J., Camera R., Fassio A. NetSyMoD - an integrated approach for water resources management. Integrated Water Management 2008, 69-93. Springer, Netherlands. P. Meir, M. Coenen, C. Lombardo, M. Robba, R. Sacile (Eds.).
33. Greco S., Matarazzo B., Slowinski R. Decision rule approach. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys 2005, 507-562. Springer Verlag, Boston, Dordrecht, London. J. Figueira, S. Greco, M. Ehrgott (Eds.).
34. Guitouni A., Martel J.M. Tentative guidelines to help choosing the appropriate MCDA method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1998, 109:501-521.
35. Ishizaka A., Labib A. Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38:14336-14345.
36. Kablan M.M. Decision support for energy conservation promotion: an analytic hierarchy process approach. Energy Policy 2004, 32:1151-1158.
37. Kelly (Lechter) R.A., Jakeman A.J., Barreteau O., Borsuk M.E., El Sawah S., Hamilton S.H., Henriksen H.J., Kuikka S., Maier H.T., Rizzoli A.E., Delden H., Voinov A.A. Selecting among five common modelling approaches for integrated environmental assessment and management. Env. Model. Softw. 2013, 47:159-181.
38. Krueger T., Page T., Hubacek K., Smith L., Hiscock K. The role of expert opinion in environmental modelling. Env. Model. Softw. 2012, 36:4-18.
39. Letcher R., Giupponi C. Policies and tools for sustainable water management in the European union. Env. Model. Softw. 2004, 20:93-98.
40. Lippe M., Thai Minh T., Neef A., Hilger T., Hoffmann V., Lam N.T., Cadisch G. Building on qualitative datasets and participatory processes to simulate land use change in a mountain watershed of Northwest Vietnam. Env. Model. Softw. 2011, 26(12):1454-1466.
41. Maarten S., Selvin A.M. Towards a framework for collaborative modeling and simulation. Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'96). BOston, Massachusetts, USA 1996, ACM, New York.
42. Macharis C., Springael J., De Brucker K., Verbeke A. PROMETHEE and AHP: the design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis. Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2004, 153:307-317.
43. Mysiak J., Giupponi C., Rosato P. Towards the development of a decision support system for water resources management. Env. Model. Softw. 2005, 20(2):203-214.
44. Oliver D.M., Fish R.D., Winter M., Hodgson C.J., Heathwaite A.L., Chadwick D.R. Valuing local knowledge as a source of expert data: farmer engagement and the design of decision support systems. Environ. Model. Softw. 2012, 36:76-85.
45. Oliver P. Natural resource and environmental management partnerships: panacea, placebo or palliative?. Coast to Coast 2002, 2002:333-336.
46. Pohekar S.D., Ramachandran M. Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning - a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004, 8:365-381.
47. Reed M. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:2417-2431.
48. Reed M.S., Dougill A.J., Baker T. Participatory indicator development: what can ecologists and local communities learn from each other?. Ecol. Appl. 2008, 18(5):1253-1269.
49. Richards C., Blackstock K.L., Carter C.E. Practical Approaches to Participation SERG Policy Brief No. 1 2004, Macauley Land Use Research Institute, Aberdeen.
50. Rittgen P. Negotiating models. LNCS 2007, vol. 4495:561-573. Springer. J. Krogstie, A.L. Opdahl, G. Sindre (Eds.).
51. Rouwette E., Vennix J., Van Mullekom T. Group model building effectiveness. A review of assessment studies. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 2002, 18(1):5-45.
52. Saaty T.L. Ascaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J.Math. Psychol. 1977, 15:234-281.
53. Saaty T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process 1980, McGraw-Hill, NewYork.
54. Saaty T.L. The Analytic Network Process 2001, RWS Pub., Pittsburgh.
55. Saaty T.L. Decision-making with the AHP: why is the principal eigenvector necessary. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2003, 145:85-91.
56. Saaty T.L., Peniwati K. Group Decision Making: Drawing Out and Reconciling Differences 2007, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
57. Saaty T.L. Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making. Why pair- wise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors. The analytic hierarchy/network process. Rev. la Real Acad. Cienc. Serie A Mat. 2008, 102(2):251-318.
58. Saaty T.L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 2008, 1(1):83-98.
59. Sànchez-Marrè M., Gibert K., Sojda R.S., Steyer J.P., Struss P., Rodríguez-Roda I., Comas J., Brilhante V., Roehl E.A. Intelligent Environmental Decision Support Systems. Environmental Modelling, Software and Decision Support 2008, Elsevier B.V., (Chapter 8).
60. Sandoval R. Aparticipatory approach to integrated aquifer management: the case of Guanajuato State, Mexico. Hydrogeol. J. 2004, 12:6-13.
61. Sgobbi A., Giupponi C. Models and decision support systems for participatory decision making in integrated water resource management. Options Méditerranéens: Série B. Etudes et Recherches 56 2007, 259-271. (Bari, Italy).
62. Soncini-Sessa R., Cellina F., Pianosi F., Weber E. Integrated and Participatory Water Resources Management. Practice 2007, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
63. Stewart G.W. Matrix Algorithms 2001, vol. II. SIAM.
64. Stringer L.C., Reed M.S., Dougill A.J., Rokitzki M., Seely M. Enhancing participation in the implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. Nat. Resour. Forum 2007, 31:198-211.
65. Vargas L.G. An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1990, 48(11):2-8.
66. Vedwan N., Ahmad S., Miralles-Wilhelm F., Broad K., Letson D., Podesta G. Institutional evolution in Lake Okeechobee management in Florida: characteristics, impacts, and limitations. Water Resour. Manag. 2008, 22:699-718.
67. Voinov A., Bousquet F. Modelling with stakeholders. Environ. Model. Softw. 2010, 25(11):1268-1281.
68. Wester P., Hoogesteger J., Vincent L. Local IWRM organizations for groundwater regulation: the experiences of the Aquifer Management Councils (COTAS) in Guanajuato, Mexico. Nat. Resour. Forum 2009, 33(1):29-38.
69. Wester P., Sandoval Minero R., Hoogesteger J. Assessment of the development of aquifer management councils (COTAS) for sustainable groundwater management in Guanajuato, Mexico. Hydrogeol. J. 2011, 19:889-899.
70. Younge A., Fowkes S. The cape action plan for the environment: overview of an ecoregional planning process. Biol. Conserv. 2003, 112:15-28.