40 research outputs found

    Water Policies and Conflict Resolution of Public Participation Decision-Making Processes Using Prioritized Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) Operators

    Full text link
    [EN] There is a growing interest in environmental policies about how to implement public participation engagement in the context of water resources management. This paper presents a robust methodology, based on ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operators, to conflict resolution decision-making problems under uncertain environments due to both information and stakeholders' preferences. The methodology allows integrating heterogeneous interests of the general public and stakeholders on account of their different degree of acceptance or preference and level of influence or power regarding the measures and policies to be adopted, and also of their level of involvement (i.e., information supply, consultation and active involvement). These considerations lead to different environmental and socio-economic outcomes, and levels of stakeholders' satisfaction. The methodology establishes a prioritization relationship over the stakeholders. The individual stakeholders' preferences are aggregated through their associated weights, which depend on the satisfaction of the higher priority decision maker. The methodology ranks the optimal management strategies to maximize the stakeholders' satisfaction. It has been successfully applied to a real case study, providing greater fairness, transparency, social equity and consensus among actors. Furthermore, it provides support to environmental policies, such as the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), improving integrated water management while covering a wide range of objectives, management alternatives and stakeholders.Llopis Albert, C.; Merigó-Lindahl, JM.; Liao, H.; Xu, Y.; Grima-Olmedo, J.; Grima-Olmedo, C. (2018). Water Policies and Conflict Resolution of Public Participation Decision-Making Processes Using Prioritized Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) Operators. Water Resources Management. 32(2):497-510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1823-2S497510322Amin GR, Sadeghi H (2010) Application of prioritized aggregation operators in preference voting. Int J Intell Syst 25(10):1027–1034Chen TY (2014) A prioritized aggregation operator-based approach to multiple criteria decision making using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets: A comparative perspective. Inf Sci 281:97–112Chen LH, Xu ZS (2014) A prioritized aggregation operator based on the OWA operator and prioritized measures. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27:1297–1307Chen LH, Xu ZS, Yu XH (2014a) Prioritized measure-guided aggregation operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22:1127–1138Chen LH, Xu ZS, Yu XH (2014b) Weakly prioritized measure aggregation in prioritized multicriteria decision making. Int J Intell Syst 29:439–461CHJ (2016). Júcar river basin authority http://www.chj.es/CHS (2016). Segura river basin authority http://www.chsegura.es/Dong JY, Wan SP (2016) A new method for prioritized multi-criteria group decision making with triangular intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30:1719–1733EC (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of October 23 2000 Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, L327/1eL327/72 22.12.2000Jackson S, Tan P-L, Nolan S (2012) Tools to enhance public participation and confidence in the development of the Howard East aquifer water plan, Northern Territory. J Hydrol 474:22–28Jin FF, Ni ZW, Chen HY (2016) Note on “Hesitant fuzzy prioritized operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making”. Knowl-Based Syst 96:115–119Kentel E, Aral MM (2007) Fuzzy Multiobjective Decision-Making Approach for Groundwater Resources Management. J Hydrol Eng 12(2):206–217. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2007)12:2(206).Kirchherr J, Charles KJ, Walton MJ (2016) Multi-causal pathways of public opposition to dam project in Asia: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Glob Environ Chang 41:33–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.08.001Llopis-Albert C, Pulido-Velazquez D (2015) Using MODFLOW code to approach transient hydraulic head with a sharp-interface solution. Hydrol Process 29(8):2052–2064. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10354Llopis-Albert C, Palacios-Marqués D, Soto-Acosta P (2015) Decision-making and stakeholders constructive participation in environmental projects. J Bus Res 68:1641–1644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.02.010Llopis-Albert C, Merigó JM, Xu Y, Huchang L (2017) Improving regional climate projections by prioritized aggregation via ordered weighted averaging operators. Environ Eng Sci. https://doi.org/10.1089/ees.2016.0546Maia R (2017) The WFD Implementation in the European Member States. Water Resour Manag 31(10):3043–3060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1723-5Malczewski J, Chapman T, Flegel C, Walters D, Shrubsole D, Healy MA (2003) GIS - multicriteria evaluation with ordered weighted averaging (OWA): case study of developing watershed management strategies. Environ Plan A 35:1769–1784. https://doi.org/10.1068/a35156Merigó JM, Casanovas M (2011) The uncertain generalized owa operator and its application to financial decision making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 10(2):211–230Merigó JM, Yager RR (2013) Generalized moving averages, distance measures and OWA operators. Int J Uncertain, Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 21(4):533–559Merigó JM, Palacios-Marqués D, Ribeiro-Navarrete B (2015) Aggregation systems for sales forecasting. J Bus Res 68:2299–2304Mesiar R, Stupnanová A, Yager RR (2015) Generalizations of OWA Operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(6):2154–2162O’Hagan M (1988) Aggregating Template Rule Antecedents in Real-time Expert Systems with Fuzzy Set Logic. In: Proceedings of 22nd annual IEEE Asilomar Conference on Signals. IEEE and Maple Press, Pacific Grove, Systems and Computers, pp 681–689Rahmani MA, Zarghami M (2013) A new approach to combine climate change projections by ordered weighting averaging operator; applications to northwestern provinces of Iran. Glob Planet Chang 102:41–50Ran LG, Wei GW (2015) Uncertain prioritized operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Technol Econ Dev Econ 21:118–139Ruiz-Villaverde, A., García-Rubio, M.A. (2017). Public Participation in European Water Management: from Theory to Practice. Water Resour Manag 31(8), 2479–2495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1355-1Sadiq R, Tesfamariam S (2007) Probability density functions based weights for ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operators: An example of water quality indices. Eur J Oper Res 182:1350–1368Sadiq R, Rodríguez MJ, Tesfamariam S (2010) Integrating indicators for performance assessment of small water utilities using ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operators. Expert Syst Appl 37:4881–4891Verma R, Sharma B (2016) Prioritized information fusion method for triangular fuzzy information and its application to multiple attribute decision making. Int J Uncertain, Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 24:265–290Wang HM, Xu YJ, Merigó JM (2014) Prioritized aggregation for non-homogeneous group decision making in water resource management. Econ Comput Econ Cybern Stud Res 48(1):247–258Wei GW (2012) Hesitant fuzzy prioritized operators. Knowl-Based Syst 31:176–182Wei CP, Tang XJ (2012) Generalized prioritized aggregation operators. Int J Intell Syst 27:578–589Xu ZS (2005) An Overview of Methods for Determining OWA Weights. Int J Intell Syst 20:843–865Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making, IEEE Transactions on Systems. Man Cybern B 18(1988):183–190Yager RR (2008) Prioritized Aggregation Operators. Int J Approx Reason 48:263–274Yan H-B, Huynh V-N, Nakamori Y, Murai T (2011) On prioritized weighted aggregation in multi-criteria decision making. Expert Syst Appl 38(1):812–823Ye J (2014) Prioritized aggregation operators of trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their application to multicriteria decision-making. Neural Comput & Applic 25:1447–1454Yu XH, Xu ZS, Liu SS (2013) Prioritized multi-criteria decision making based on preference relations. Comput Ind Eng 66:104–115Zadeh LA (1983) A Computational Approach to Fuzzy Quantifiers in Natural Languages. Comput Math Appl 9:149–184Zarghami M, Szidarovszky F (2009) Revising the OWA operator for multi criteria decision making problems under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res 198:259–265Zarghami M, Ardakanian R, Memariani A, Szidarovszky F (2008) Extended OWA Operator for Group Decision Making on Water Resources Projects. J Water Resour Plan Manag 134(3):266–275. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2008)134:3(266)Zarghami M, Szidarovszky F, Ardakanian R (2009) Multi-attribute decision making on inter-basin water transfer projects. Transaction E. Ind Eng 16(1):73–80Zhao XF, Li QX, Wei GW (2014) Some prioritized aggregating operators with linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:1619–1630Zhao N, Xu ZS, Ren ZL (2016) On typical hesitant fuzzy prioritized “or” operator in multi-attribute decision making. Int J Intell Syst 31:73–100Zhou LY, Lin R, Zhao XF, Wei GW (2013) Uncertain linguistic prioritized aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Int J Uncertain, Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 21:603–627Zhou LG, Merigó JM, Chen HY, Liu JP (2016) The optimal group continuous logarithm compatibility measure for interval multiplicative preference relations based on the COWGA operator. Inf Sci 328:250–26

    Definitions, Foundations and Associations of Physical Literacy: A Systematic Review

    Get PDF
    Background: The concept of physical literacy has stimulated increased research attention in recent years—being deployed in physical education, sport participation, and the promotion of physical activity. Independent research groups currently operationalize the construct differently. Objective The purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a systematic review of the physical literacy construct,as reflected in contemporary research literature. Methods: Five databases were searched using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria were English language, peer reviewed, published by March 2016, and seeking to conceptualize physical literacy. Articles that met these criteria were analysed in relation to three core areas: properties/attributes, philosophicalfoundations and theoretical associations with other constructs. A total of 50 published articles met the inclusion criteria and were analysed qualitatively using inductive thematic analysis.Results: The thematic analysis addressed the three core areas. Under definitions, core attributes that define physical literacy were identified, as well as areas of conflict between different approaches currently being adopted. One relatively clear philosophical approach was prominent in approximately half of the papers, based on a monist/holistic ontology and phenomenological epistemology. Finally, theanalysis identified a number of theoretical associations, including health, physical activity and academic performance.Conclusions: Current literature contains different representations of the physical literacy construct. The costs and benefits of adopting an exclusive approach versus pluralism are considered. Recommendations for both researchers and practitioners focus on identifying and clearly articulating the definitions, philosophical assumptions and expected outcomes prior to evaluating the effectiveness of this emerging concept

    ‘Measuring’ Physical Literacy and Related Constructs: A Systematic Review of Empirical Findings

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND:The concept of physical literacy has received increased research and international attention recently. Where intervention programs and empirical research are gaining momentum, their operationalizations differ significantly.OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to inform practice in the measure/assessment of physical literacy via a systematic review of research that has assessed physical literacy (up to 14 June, 2017).METHODS:Five databases were searched using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols guidelines, with 32 published articles meeting the inclusion criteria. English-language, peer-reviewed published papers containing empirical studies of physical literacy were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.RESULTS:Qualitative methods included: (1) interviews; (2) open-ended questionnaires; (3) reflective diaries; (4) focus groups; (5) participant observations; and (6) visual methods. Quantitative methods included: (1) monitoring devices (e.g., accelerometers); (2) observations (e.g., of physical activity or motor proficiency); (3) psychometrics (e.g., enjoyment, self-perceptions); (4) performance measures (e.g., exergaming, objective times/distances); (5) anthropometric measurements; and (6) one compound measure. Of the measures that made an explicit distinction: 22 (61%) examined the physical domain, eight (22%) the affective domain; five (14%) the cognitive domain; and one (3%) combined three domains (physical, affective, and cognitive) of physical literacy. Researchers tended to declare their philosophical standpoint significantly more in qualitative research compared with quantitative research.CONCLUSIONS:Current research adopts diverse often incompatible methodologies in measuring/assessing physical literacy. Our analysis revealed that by adopting simplistic and linear methods, physical literacy cannot be measured/assessed in a traditional/conventional sense. Therefore, we recommend that researchers are more creative in developing integrated philosophically aligned approaches to measuring/assessing physical literacy. Future research should consider the most recent developments in the field of physical literacy for policy formation

    Determination of rainfall-runoff relationship in Yenicegoruce Basin with

    Get PDF
    The goal of this study is to model rainfall-runoff process using HEC-HMS developed by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the 10,508 km(2) catchment that has E01A012-Yenicegoruce stream gage at its outlet which is located just at the upstream of the point where Meric and Ergene Rivers meet. This study is conducted as a part of 115Y064 numbered "Development of a geographical information systems based decision-making tool for water quality management of Ergene watershed using pollutant fingerprints" project funded by TUBITAK. First, meteorological parameters such as daily precipitation and temperature, and daily streamflow data that are observed in and around the study catchment are collected. Then land use, hydrologic soil groups and digital elevation data of the catchment are collected and integrated into Geographic Information System (GIS) environment. Digital maps compiled in GIS environment were transferred into WMS for the calculation of basin parameters, and then the hydrological model for the basin is developed in HEC-HMS using these data. The model is calibrated using daily streamflow values of 1997-2002 and validated for 2003-2005 data. The model results obtained at the Yenicegoruce stream gage has Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) values of 0.8 and 0.75 for calibration and validation, respectively. Hydrological models for Hayrabolu, Luleburgaz and Inanli sub-catchments represented by stream gages D01A008, E01A006 and E01A012, respectively are developed and calibrated as well. Model performances are evaluated using statistical measures such as NSE values and correlations.C1 [Mesta, Buket] Orta Dogu Tekn Univ, Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu, Yer Sistem Bilimleri, Ankara, Turkey.[Kargi, Pinar Gokce; Ayvaz, M. Tamer] Pamukkale Univ, Muhendislik Fak, Insaat Muhendisligi Bolumu, Denizli, Turkey.[Tezyapar, Ipek; Goktas, Recep Kaya] Kocaeli Univ, Muhendislik Fak, Cevre Muhendisligi Bolumu, Kocaeli, Turkey.[Kentel, Elcin] Orta Dogu Tekn Univ Univ, Muhendislik Fak, Insaat Muhendisligi Bolumu, Ankara, Turkey.[Tezel, Ulas] Bogazici Univ, Cevre Muhendisligi Bolumu, Cevre Bilimleri Enstitusu, Istanbul, Turkey

    Regulatory Framework in Sludge Management: Examples from Around the World

    No full text
    Treatment and disposal/beneficial use are the most important aspects of municipal sludge management. Particularly, the application guidelines and limit values for treatment systems and the major disposal routes including landfilling, land application and incineration are covered in the legislations. This study aims to review the legislations about municipal sludge treatment and disposal from different counties such as Turkey, USA, EU, Canada and South Africa. Evaluations show that the current legislations place a greater emphasis on the beneficial use of sludge, rather than the mere disposal. The specifics of regulations related to combustion changes between different countries such that in some countries separate regulation for sludge combustion is implemented, whereas in others sludge is not specifically mentioned but included among the big group of wastes to be combusted. Similarly, some countries have particular regulations for landfilling of sludge, whereas the others consider sludge within the greater category of biodegradable wastes together with the organic fraction of solid wastes. This study compares and contrasts these issues and current legislations of the aforementioned countries

    A GIS Tool to Estimate Flow at Ungaged Basins Using the Map Correlation Method

    No full text
    Water resources management has been a critical component of sustainable resources planning. One of the most commonly used data in water resources management is streamflow measurements. Daily streamflow time series collected at a stream gage provide information on the temporal variation in water quantity where the gage is located. However, streamflow information is often needed at ungaged catchments especially when the stream gage network is not dense. One conventional approach to estimate streamflow at an ungaged catchment is to transfer streamflow measurements from the spatially closest stream gage, commonly referred to as the donor or reference gage using the drainage-area ratio method. Recently, the correlation between daily streamflow time series is proposed as an alternative to distance for reference stream gage selection. The Map Correlation Method (MCM) enables development of a map that demonstrates the spatial distribution of correlation coefficients between daily streamflow time series at a selected stream gage and all other locations within a selected study area. Although utility of the map correlation method has been demonstrated in various studies, due to its geostatistical analysis procedure it is time-consuming and hard to implement for practical purposes such as installed capacity selection of run-of-river hydropower plants during their feasibility studies. In this study, an easy-to-use GIS-based tool, called MCM_GIS is developed to apply the MCM in estimating daily time series of streamflow. MCM_GIS provides a user-friendly working environment and flexibility in choosing between two types of interpolation models, kriging and inverse distance weighting. The main motivation of this study is to increase practical application of the MCM by integrating it to the GIS environment. MCM_GIS can also carry out the leave-one-out cross-validation scheme to monitor the overall performance of the estimation. The tool is demonstrated on a case study carried out in Western Black Sea Region, Turkey. ESRI's ArcGIS for Desktop product along with a Python script is utilized. The outcomes of inverse distance weighting and ordinary kriging are compared. Results of GIS-based MCM are in good agreement with the observed hydrographs
    corecore