Evaluation of basin environmental vulnerability: The weighted method compared to the compromise method

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 10, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1051-1056

  Chang, C L ^a  

^a FENG CHIA UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Basin; Environmental vulnerability; Multiple criteria analysis; The compromise method; The weighted method

Indexed keywords

RIVERS; SURVEYS; WATERSHEDS;

BASIN; ENVIRONMENTAL VULNERABILITY; MULTIPLE CRITERIA ANALYSIS; THE COMPROMISE METHOD; WEIGHTED METHOD;

LAND USE;

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; BASIN MANAGEMENT; LAND USE CHANGE; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; VULNERABILITY;

TAIWAN;

EID: 84891647186     PISSN: 17351472     EISSN: 17352630     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13762-013-0234-z     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Ahn BS, Park KS (2008) Comparing methods for multiattribute decision making with ordinal weights. Comput Oper Res 35: 1660-1670.
2. Briguglio L (1995) Small islands states and their economic vulnerabilities. World Dev 23: 1615-1632.
3. Chang CL (2010) A modified VIKOR method for multiple criteria analysis. Environ Monit Assess 168(1-4): 339-344.
4. Chang C L, Chao YC (2011) Using the analytical hierarchy process to assess the environmental vulnerabilities of basins in Taiwan. Environ Monit Assess (on-line first).
5. Chang CL, Hsu CH (2009) Multi-criteria analysis via the VIKOR method for prioritizing land-use restraint strategies in the Tseng-Wen reservoir watershed. J Environ Manage 90(11): 3226-3230.
6. Chang CL, Hsu CH (2011) Applying a modified VIKOR method to classify land subdivisions according to watershed vulnerability. Water Resour Manage 25(1): 301-309.
7. Chang CL, Chiueh PT, Liou YT (2008a) Applying VIKOR to determine the land-use restraint strategies in a watershed. Environ Eng Sci 25(9): 1317-1324.
8. Chang CL, Chiueh PT, Peng YS (2008b) A vulnerability analysis in the Fei-tsui reservoir watershed in Taiwan. Environ Monit Assess 143(1-3): 9-14.
9. Committee to Assess the Scientific Basis of the TMDL Approach to Water Pollution (2001) Assessing TMDL approach to water quality management. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
10. Craig EH, Karen AK (1995) To normalize or not to normalize? Fat is the question. Environ Toxicol Chem 14(5): 801-807.
11. Downs PW, Gregory KJ, Brookes A (1991) How integrated is river basin management? Environ Manage 15(3): 299-309.
12. Guh YY (1997) Introduction to a new weighting method-Hierarchy consistency analysis. Eur J Oper Res 102: 215-226.
13. Jaspers FGW (2003) Institutional arrangements for integrated river basin management. Water Policy 5: 77-90.
14. Kackar RN (1985) Off-line quality control, parameter design and the Taguchi method. J Qual Technol 17: 176-188.
15. Kaly U, Pratt C (2000) Environmental vulnerability index: development and provisional indices and profiles for Fiji, Samoa, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. SOPAC technical report 306.
16. Kaly U, Briguglio L, McLeod H, Schmall S, Pratt C, Pal R (1999) Environmental vulnerability index (EVI) to summarise national environmental vulnerability profiles. SOPAC technical report 275.
17. Kaly U, Pratt C, Howorth R (2002) A framework for managing environmental vulnerability in small island developing states. Dev Bull 58: 33-38.
18. Kuhn HW, Tucker AW (1951) Nonlinear programming. In: Neyman J (ed) Proceedings of the second Berkley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 481-492.
19. Lin JS, Yu SL, Lee TC (2000) Managing Taiwan's reservoir watersheds by zoning approach. J Am Water Resour Assoc 36(5): 989-1001.
20. Lu SY, Cheng JD, Brooks KN (2001) Managing forests for watershed protection in Taiwan. For Ecol Manage 143: 77-85.
21. Mostaghimi S, Park SW, Cooke RA, Wang SY (1997) Assessment of management alternatives on a small agriculture watershed. Water Res 31(8): 1867-1878.
22. Noble EE, Sanchez PP (1993) A note on the information content of a consistent pairwise comparison judgment matrix of an AHP decision maker. Theor Decis 34(2): 99-108.
23. Opricovic S (1998) Multi-criteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade.
24. Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156: 445-455.
25. Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2007) Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. Eur J Oper Res 178: 514-529.
26. Pantin D (1997) Alternative ecological vulnerability indicators for developing countries with special reference to small island developing states (SIDS). Report to UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 22.
27. Pareto V (1896) Cours d'Economie Politique. Droz, Geneva.
28. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York.
29. Saaty TL (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 48(1): 9-26.
30. Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1): 83-98.
31. Tong LI, Chen CC, Wang CH (2007) Optimization of multi-response processes using the VIKOR method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 31: 1049-1057.
32. Tzeng GH, Teng MH, Chen JJ, Opricovic S (2002) Multicriteria selection for a restaurant location in Taipei. Int J Hospit Manag 21(2): 171-187.
33. Tzeng GH, Lin CW, Opricovic S (2005) Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation. Energy Policy 33: 1373-1383.
34. US Environmental Protection Agency (1991) Guidance for water quality-based decisions: the TMDL process. Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, US EPA, Washington, DC.
35. Villa F, McLeod H (2002) Environmental vulnerability indicators for environmental planning and decision-making: guidelines and applications. Environ Manage 29(3): 335-348.
36. Wang X (2001) Integrating water-quality management and land-use planning in a watershed context. J Environ Manage 61: 25-36.
37. Zadeh LA (1963) Optimality and non-scalar-valued performance criteria. IEEE Trans Autom Control 8(1): 59-60.