Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Dairy Effluent Management Options Using Multiple Criteria Analysis

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes how options for managing dairy effluent on the Lower Murray River in South Australia were evaluated using multiple criteria analysis (MCA). Multiple criteria analysis is a framework for combining multiple environmental, social, and economic objectives in policy decisions. At the time of the study, dairy irrigation in the region was based on flood irrigation which involved returning effluent to the river. The returned water contained nutrients, salts, and microbial contaminants leading to environmental, human health, and tourism impacts. In this study MCA was used to evaluate 11 options against 6 criteria for managing dairy effluent problems. Of the 11 options, the MCA model selected partial rehabilitation of dairy paddocks with the conversion of remaining land to other agriculture. Soon after, the South Australian Government adopted this course of action and is now providing incentives for dairy farmers in the region to upgrade irrigation infrastructure and/or enter alternative industries.

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

References

  • Adhikari M, Paudel KP, Martin NR Jr, Gauthier WM (2005) Economics of dairy waste use as fertilizer in central Texas. Waste Management 25:1067–1074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2001) Water Account Australia. ABS Catalogue No. 4610.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, 137 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2004). Year Book Australia. N umber 86. ABS Catalogue No. 1301.0, Australian Bureau of Statistics. Canberra, 872 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck MP, Lin BW (1983) Some heuristics for the consensus ranking problem. Computers and Operations Research 10: 1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennet J (2005) Australasian environmental economics: contributions, conflicts and cop-outs. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 49: 243–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodini A, Ricci A Viaroli P (2000) A multimethodological approach for the sustainable management of perifluvial wetlands of the Po River (Italy). Environmental Management 26: 59–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojórquez-Tapia LA, Sánchez-Colon S, Martinez AF. (2005). Building Consensus in Environmental Impact Assessment Through Multicriteria Modeling and Sensitivity Analysis. Environmental Management 36(3): 469–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brans JP, Mareschal B (2005) Pages 163–195 in Figueira J., G. Salvatore, M. Ehrgott (Eds), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the art surveys, Springer, New York

  • Brans JP, Vincke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research 24: 228–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer R, van Ek R (2004) Integrated ecological, economic and social impact assessment of alternative flood control policies in the Netherlands. Ecological Economics 50:1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassells SM, Meister AD (2001) Cost and trade impacts of environmental regulations: effluent control and the New Zealand dairy sector. Australian Journal of Agricultural & Resource Economics 45(2): 257–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook WD, Kress M (1990) A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings. Management Science 36: 1302–1310

    Google Scholar 

  • d’Angelo A, Eskandari A, Szidarovszky F (1998) Social choice procedures in water resource management. Journal of Environmental Management 52: 203–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demirel B, Yenigun O, Onay TT. (2005) Anaerobic treatment of dairy wastewaters: a review. Process Biochemistry 40: 2583–2595

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • DWLBC (Department of Water, Land, Biodiversity Conservation) (2003) Guidelines: New requirements and public financial assistance for irrigated agriculture in the Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Areas. Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, Government of South Australia, Adelaide, 3pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Eder G, Duckstein L, Nachtnebel HP (1997) Ranking water resource projects and evaluating criteria by multicriterion Q-analysis: an Austrian case study. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 6: 259–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emond EJ, Mason DW (2002) A new rank correlation coefficient with application to the consensus ranking problem. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. 11: 17–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) (2003) EPA Guidelines for Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Areas. Environmental Protection Agency, Adelaide, South Australia, 5pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (Eds) (2005) Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys. Springer: New York; 1045 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Gershon M, Duckstein L (1983) Multiobjective approaches to river basin planning. Journal of the Water Resources Planning and Management Division 109: 13–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajkowicz SA, McDonald GT, Smith PN (2000) An evaluation of multiple objective decision support weighting techniques in natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43: 505–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubble I, Phillips R (1999) Tasmanian dairy farm effluent management program. Journal of Cleaner Production 7: 167–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen R. (2001) On the use of multi-criteria analysis in environmental impact assessment in the Netherlands. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 10: 101–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joubert AR, Leiman A, de Klerk HM, Katau S, Aggenbach JC (1997) Fynbos vegetation and the supply of water: a comparison of multi-criteria decision analysis and cost benefit analysis. Ecological Economics 22: 123–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasanen E, Wallenius H, Wallenius J, Zionts S (2000) A study of high-level managerial decision processes, with implications for MCDM research. European Journal of Operational Research 120: 496–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs, Second edition. Cambridge University Press, London, 569pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahdelma R, Salminen R, Hokkanen J (2000) Using multiple criteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environmental Management 26: 595–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LMIAG (Lower Murray Irrigation Action Group) (1999) Draft Land and Water Management Plan for the Lower Murray Reclaimed Swamp Irrigation Areas. LMIAG, Murray Bridge, South Australia, pp 53

    Google Scholar 

  • Mardle S, Pascoe S, Herrero I (2004) Management Objective Importance in Fisheries: An Evaluation Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Environmental Management 33:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza G, Prabhu R (2000) Development of a Methodology for Selecting Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management: A Case Study on Participatory Assessment. Environmental Management 26: 659–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers J, Rosenhead J (2004) Problem structuring methods in action. European Journal of Operational Research 152: 530–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munda G (2005) In: Figueira J, Salvatore G, Ehrgott M, (eds), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the art surveys, Springer, New York pp. 953–987

  • Ozelkan EC, Duckstein L (1996) Analysing water resource alternatives and handling criteria by multi criterion decision techniques. Journal of Environmental Management 48: 69–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prato T. (1999) Multiple attribute decision analysis for ecosystem management. Ecological Economics 30: 207–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raju KS, Duckstein L, Arondel C (2000) Multicriterion Analysis for Sustainable Water Resources Planning: A Case Study in Spain. Water Resources Management 14: 435–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RMWRC (River Murray Water Resources Committee) (1995) River Murray Regional Water Resource Management Plan - Border to the Barrages and Beyond. River Murray Water Resources Committee, Berri, South Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy B. (1968) Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). la Revue d’Informatique et de Recherche Opérationnelle (RIRO) 8: 57–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (2005) In: Figueira J, Salvatore G, Ehrgott M (eds) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the art surveys, Springer, New York pp. 345–408

  • Scheubrein R, Zionts SA (2006) A problem structuring front end for a multiple criteria decision support system. Computers & Operations Research 33: 18–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo F, Sakawa M (1988) Multiple criteria decision analysis in regional planning: concepts, methods and applications. Kluwer Academic, Boston, 535pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Strijker D, Sijtsma FJ, Wiersma D (2000) Evaluation of Nature Conservation: An Application to the Dutch Ecological Network. Environmental and Resource Economics 16: 363–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vellidis G, Smith MC, Leibowitz SG, Ainslie WB, Pruitt BA (2003) Prioritizing wetland restoration for sediment yield reduction: a conceptual model. Environmental Management 31: 301–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber M, Borcherding K (1993) Behavioural influences on weight judgements in multiattribute decision making. European Journal of Operational Research 67: 1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weistroffer HR, Smith CH, Narula SC (2005) In: Figueira J, Salvatore G, Ehrgott M (eds) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the art surveys, Springer, New York pp. 989–1018

  • Wheeler S, Young D, Bright M (2001) Consultancy for Lower Murray Reclaimed Irrigation Areas: Options study stage two. Volume 1. PIRSA Rural Solutions, Adelaide, 111 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittle J, Philcox M (1996) Drainage Management Options for the Lower Murray Reclaimed Swamps. Primary Industries South Australia, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • Willers HC, Karamanlis XN, Schulte DD (1999) Potential of closed water systems on dairy farms. Water Science Technology 39: 113–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanakis SH, Solomon A, Wishart N, Dublish S (1998) Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of selected methods. European Journal of Operational Research 107: 507–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeleny M (1973) In: Cocharane JL, Zeleny M (eds) Multiple criteria decision making, University of Southern Carolina Press, Columbia, S.C pp. 262–301

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by PIRSA (Primary Industries and Resources of South Australia). It formed part of a larger economic study into managing the LMRIA involving Doug Young, Melissa Bright, and Andrew Manson of PIRSA. The PIRSA team supplied valuable advice and assisted with the MCA work. We are much appreciative to the panel of 10 persons who provided input to the MCA. Follow-up advice on current progress in the LMRIA region was supplied by Graham Copley of the Department of Water Land and Biodiversity Conservation. We are also grateful for detailed review feedback from Andy Reeson and Ainsley Archer of CSIRO and Ron Janssen, Tony Prato, and two anonymous reviewers acting for the Journal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, 306 Carmody Road, St Lucia, QLD, 4067, Australia

    Stefan A. Hajkowicz

  2. Centre for Regulation and Market Analysis, School of Commerce, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Sarah A. Wheeler

Authors
  1. Stefan A. Hajkowicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sarah A. Wheeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan A. Hajkowicz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hajkowicz, S.A., Wheeler, S.A. Evaluation of Dairy Effluent Management Options Using Multiple Criteria Analysis. Environmental Management 41, 613–624 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-007-9060-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-007-9060-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation