Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Multi-level Strategic Group Decision Making for Understanding and Analysis of Sustainable Watershed Planning in Response to Environmental Perplexities

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Watershed-based planning and long-term citizen-based monitoring are two highly significant components of natural resources management. There is a dialectic connection between two concepts of sustainability and strategic planning. However, the conventional strategic matrices are not capable of analyzing the internal and external strategic factors on the basis of sustainability paradigm. Throughout the current paper, a novel, strategic group decision-making context was introduced for multiple criteria analysis of the watershed-based strategic planning. Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method was merged into the Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix (QSPM) to determine the most attractive strategic group. Moreover, Compromise Programming procedure was employed to identify the most conclusive strategy. The combination of TOPSIS along with QSPM incorporated a set of sustainable development criteria in watershed planning. Prior to this combination, the economic, social, environmental and technical components of sustainable development were weighted based on Shannon Entropy technique. According to this simple yet practical context, establishment of an integrated system of operation, protection and monitoring of water resources was the highest priority within the watershed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AHP:

Analytic hierarchy process

AS:

Attractiveness Scores

CP:

Compromise programming

EFs:

External factors

EFE:

External factor evaluation

IFs:

Internal factors

IFE:

Internal factor evaluation

MCA:

Multiple criteria analysis

QSPM:

Quantitative strategic planning matrix

SDC:

Sustainable development criteria

SIG:

Significance

STAS:

Sum Total Attractiveness Score

SWOT:

Strengths–weaknesses–opportunities–threats

TAS:

Total Attractiveness Scores

TOPSIS:

Technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution

TQSPM:

TOPSIS and QSPM

References

  • Azarnivand A, Chitsaz N (2015) Adaptive policy-responses to water shortage mitigation in arid regions—a systematic approach based on eDPSIR, DEMATEL and MCDA. Environ Monit Assess 187(2):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barreteau O, Garin P, Dumontier A, Abrami G, Cernesson F (2003) Agent-based facilitation of water allocation: case study in the Drome River Valley. Group Decis Negot 12:441–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bas E (2013) The integrated framework for analysis of electricity supply chain using an integrated SWOT-fuzzy TOPSIS methodology combined with AHP: The case of Turkey. Electr Power Energy Syst 44:897–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastiaanssen WGM, Allen RG, Droogers P, D’Urso G, Steduto P (2007) Twenty-five years modeling irrigated and drained soils: state of the art. Agric Water Manag 92:111–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borsuk M, Clemen R, Maguire L, Reckhow K (2001) Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the Neuse river watershed. Group Decis Negot 10:355–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cisneros JM, Graub JB, Antónb JM, de Pradaa JD, Canteroa A, Degioannia AJ (2011) Assessing multi-criteria approaches with environmental, economic and social attributes, weights and procedures: a case study in the Pampas, Argentina. Agric Water Manag 98:1545–1556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clare S, Krogman N, Foote L, Lemphers N (2011) Where is the avoidance in the implementation of wetland law and policy. Wetlands Ecol Manage 19:165–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colton RC (2011) Investigation of the use of MCDM tools for management of an Urbanizing Watershed, Thesis, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

  • Daher SDFD, de Almeida AT (2012) The use of ranking veto concept to mitigate the compensatory effects of additive aggregation in group decisions on a water utility automation investment. Group Decis Negot 21:185–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David FR (2011) Strategic management: concepts and cases, 13th edn. Prentice Hall, New York 384p

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Environment of Iran (DEI) (2010) Integrated management plan for Lake Urmia Basin, 91 p

  • Diamantopoulou P, Voudouris K (2008) Optimization of water resources management using SWOT analysis: the case of Zakynthos Island, Ionian Sea, Greece. Environ Geol 54:197–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doummar J, Massoud MA, Khoury R, Khawlie M (2009) Optimal water resources management: case of Lower Litani River, Lebanon. Water Resourc Manag 23:2343–2360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebonzo ADM, Liu X (2013) The use of axiomatic fuzzy set theory in AHP and TOPSIS methodology to determine strategies priorities by SWOT analysis. Qual Quant 47:2671–2685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fathian F, Morid S, Kahya E (2015) Identification of trends in hydrological and climatic variables in Urmia Lake basin, Iran. Theor Appl Climatol 119(3–4):443–464

  • Fattahi P, Fayyaz S (2010) A compromise programming model to integrated urban water management. Water Resour Manage 24:1211–1227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti V, Montibeller G (2016) Key challenges and meta-choices in designing and applying multi-criteria spatial decision support systems. Decis Support Syst. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2016.01.005

  • Gallego-Ayala J, Juizo D (2011) Strategic implementation of integrated water resources management in Mozambique: an A’WOT analysis. Phys Chem Earth 36:1103–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garousi V, Najafi A, Samadi A, Rasouli K, Khanaliloo B (2013) Environmental crisis in Lake Urmia, Iran: a systematic review of causes, negative consequences and possible solutions. 6th international perspectives on water resources and the environment, Izmir, Turkey, 7–9 Jan

  • Ghorbani A, Raufirad V, Rafiaani P, Azadi H (2015) Ecotourism sustainable development strategies using SWOT and QSPM model: a case study of Kaji Namakzar Wetland, South Khorasan Province, Iran. Tour Manag Perspect 16:290–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleick PH, Loh P, Gomes S, Morrison J (1995) California Water 2020: a sustainable vision. Pacific institute for studies in Development, Environment and Security, Oakland

  • Halabi AX, Montoya-Torres JR, Obregon N (2012) A case study of group decision method for environmental foresight and water resources planning using a fuzzy approach. Group Decis Negot 21:205–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen R, Kettunen E, Marttunen M, Ehtamo H (2001) Evaluating a framework for multi-stakeholder decision support in water resources management. Group Decis Negot 10:331–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashemi M (2008) An independent review: the status of water resources in the Lake Uromiyeh Basin. UNDP/GEF “Conservation of Iranian Wetlands” Project

  • Hill T, Westbrook R (1997) SWOT analysis: it’s time for a product recall. Long Range Plan 30(1):46–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Kinsara RA (2014) Strategic investigations of water conflicts in the middle east. Group Decis Negot 23:355–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseini-Nasab H, Milani AS (2012) An improvement of quantitative strategic planning matrix using multiple criteria decision making and fuzzy numbers. Appl Soft Comput 12(8):2246–2253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, a state of the art survey. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ishizaka A, Labib A (2011) Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Syst Appl 38:14336–14345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce C (2012) Preface: Wetland services and management. Hydrobiological 692(1):1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kajanus M, Leskinen P, Kurttila M, Kangas J (2012) Making use of MCDS methods in SWOT analysis–lessons learnt in strategic natural resources management. Forest Policy Econ 20:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karbassi AR, Jafari HR, Yavari AR, Hoveidi H, Kalal HS (2010) Reduction of environmental pollution through optimization of energy use in cement industries. Int J Environ Sci Technol 7(1):127–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenyon W (2007) Evaluating flood risk management options in Scotland: a participant-led multi-criteria approach. Ecol Econ 64:70–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kibria ASMG, Inoue M, Nath TK (2015) Analysing the land uses of forest-dwelling indigenous people in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh. Agrofor Syst 89(4):663–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski K, Stagl S, Madlener R, Omann I (2009) Sustainable energy futures: methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis. Eur J Oper Res 197:1063–1074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurttila M, Pesonen M, Kangas J, Kajanus M (2000) Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process AHP in SWOT analysis a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case. Forest Policy Econ 1:41–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leb C (2012) The right to water in a transboundary context: emergence of seminal trends. Water Int 37:640–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee YJ (1999) Sustainable wetland management strategies under uncertainties. Environmentalist 19:67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loukas A, Mylopoulos N, Vasiliades L (2007) A modeling system for the evaluation of water resources management strategies in Thessaly, Greece. Water Resourc Manag 21:1673–1702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu HW, Huang GH, Zhang YM, He L (2012) Strategic agricultural land-use planning in response to water-supplier variation in a China’s rural region. Agric Syst 108(1):19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madani K, Sheikhmohammady M, Mokhtari S, Moradi M, Xanthopoulosnter P (2014) Social planner’s solution for the Caspian Sea conflict. Group Decis Negot 23:579–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malekian A, Azarnivand A (2016) Application of integrated Shannon’s Entropy and VIKOR techniques in prioritization of flood risk in the Shemshak Watershed, Iran. Water Resourc Manag 30(1):409–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohan S, Loganathan G (2008) Strategic decision-making in irrigated agriculture using sustainability–related criteria. In: Twelfth international water technology conference, IWTC12 Alexandria, Egypt

  • Montesinos P, Camacho E, Campos B, Rodríguez-Díaz JA (2011) Analysis of virtual irrigation water. Application to water resources management in a Mediterranean River Basin. Water Resourc Manag 25:1635–1651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morais DC, de Almeida AT, Figueira JR (2014) A sorting model for group decision making: a case study of water losses in Brazil. Group Decis Negot 23:937–960

    Google Scholar 

  • Motevallian SS, Tabesh M, Roozbahani A (2014) Sustainability assessment of urban water systems: a case study. Proc Inst Civil Eng Eng Sustain 167(4):157–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Nazari S, Mousavi SJ, Behzadian K, Kapelan Z (2014) Compromise programming based scenario analysis of urban water systems management options: case study of Kerman City. In: 11th International conference on hydroinformatics HIC 2014, New York City

  • Nouri J, Karbassi AR, Mirkia S (2008) Environmental management of coastal regions in the Caspian Sea. Int J Environ Sci Technol 5(1):43–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborn AF (1963) Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative problem solving, New York, 417 p

  • Pomerol JC, Barba-Romero S (2000) Multicriterion decision in management: principles and practice. Kluwer Academic, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (2003) Decision-making with the AHP: why is the principal eigenvector necessary. Eur J Oper Res 145:85–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarandón R, Novillo MG, Muschong D, Borges VG (2009) Lacar Lake demonstration project for ecohydrology: improving land use policy at Lacar Lake Watershed based on an ecohydrological approach (San Martín de los Andes – Neuquén – R. Argentina). J Ecohydrol Hydrol 9(1):125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon CE, Weaver W (1947) The mathematical theory of communication. The University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha RK, Alavalapati JRR, Kalmbacher RS (2004) Exploring the potential for silvopasture adoption in south-central Florida: an application of SWOT AHP method. Agric Syst 81:185–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sima S, Ahmadalipour A, Tajrishy M (2013) Mapping surface temperature in a hyper-saline lake and investigating the effect of temperature distribution on the lake evaporation. Remote Sens Environ 136:374–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonovic SP, Burn DH, Lence BJ (1997) Practical sustainability criteria for decision-making. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 4(4):231–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nation Development Program [UNDP] (2008) Human development indices: a statistical update. New York

  • United Nations [UN] (2000) United Nation Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution (A/RES/55/2). UN Millennium Summit, New York, USA

  • Wasimi SA (2010) Planning for a large dam project: the case of Traveston Crossing dam. Water Resour Manage 24:2991–3015. doi:10.1007/s11269-010-9591-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Zarghami M, Szidarovszky F (2011) Multicriteria analysis: applications to water and environment management. Springer, Berlin, p 195

  • Zeleny M (1973) Compromise programming. In: Cochrane JL, Zeleny M (eds) Multiple criteria decision making. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, South Carolina

Download references

Acknowledgments

We really acknowledge critical and constructive comments and suggestions by four anonymous reviewers and respectable associate editor. The authors express their greatest gratitude , appreciation to Mr. Sajed Motevallian, the Research Assistant in School of Civil Engineering of University of Tehran for his insightful suggestions in preparing questionnaires. We appreciate Ms. Najmieh Hezarkhani for her perseverance in distributing and collecting the questionnaires. We are also grateful to Ms. Elmira Nazar for editing English writing of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Irrigation and Reclamation Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran

    Ali Azarnivand

  2. Department of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, College of Aburaihan, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammad Ebrahim Banihabib

Authors
  1. Ali Azarnivand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Ebrahim Banihabib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Ebrahim Banihabib.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Azarnivand, A., Banihabib, M.E. A Multi-level Strategic Group Decision Making for Understanding and Analysis of Sustainable Watershed Planning in Response to Environmental Perplexities. Group Decis Negot 26, 629–648 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9484-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9484-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation