Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cost Analysis of Water Quality Assessment Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In modern competitive markets, cost and quality parameters are the two main factors. So, it is essential to study their relationship, especially in leading industries such as urban public service companies. Consequently, manufacturers always try to reduce production costs and improve product quality and services to consumer expectations. Also, the concerns of the new century in the field of fresh water and the reduction of its resources related to global warming have increased the costs of quality and supply of freshwater. Therefore, in this research, in order to estimate the quality costs in the field of water resources and wastewater management and identify the option that creates the most cost, in the first step, the “Prevention, Assessment, and Failure (PAF)” model was used to select cost-imposing options in organizational quality analysis. After determining the main options, appropriate criteria and sub-criteria were selected under the main study area (water and wastewater resources management). In the next step, a “Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) “ method based on the “Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP)” and “Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS)” method was used to identify the option that creates the most cost. The results show that The highest cost of quality in the water and wastewater industry and its management are related to “Assessment Costs” and account for 36.55% of total costs. Also, The lowest cost of quality in the water and wastewater industry is related to “Preventive Costs” and accounts for only 12.18% of the total cost. In addition, the expert’s opinion shows that the effect of increasing credit with 34.01% has the greatest weight, and this criterion is the most essential in water and wastewater resources management.

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
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the submitted article.

References

  • Abu Hasan H, Muhammad MH, Ismail NI (2020) A review of biological drinking water treatment technologies for contaminants removal from polluted water resources. J Water Process Eng 33:101035. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.101035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adimalla N, Li P, Venkatayogi S (2018) Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of Groundwater Quality for Drinking and Irrigation Purposes and Integrated Interpretation with Water Quality Index Studies. Environmental Processes, 5(2), 363–383. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-018-0297-4

  • Ahmed AN, Othman FB, Afan HA, Ibrahim RK, Fai CM, Hossain MS, Elshafie A (2019) Machine learning methods for better water quality prediction. J Hydrol 578:124084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banihabib ME, Shabestari MH (2017) Fuzzy hybrid MCDM model for ranking the agricultural water demand management strategies in arid areas. Water Resour Manage 31(1):495–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borzuei D, Moosavian SF, Ahmadi A (2022) Investigating the dependence of energy prices and economic growth rates with emphasis on the development of renewable energy for sustainable development in Iran. Sustainable Development

  • Brentan B, Carpitella S, Barros D, Meirelles G, Certa A, Izquierdo J (2021) Water quality sensor placement: a multi-objective and multi-criteria approach. Water Resour Manage 35(1):225–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busico G, Giuditta E, Kazakis N, Colombani N (2019) A hybrid GIS and AHP approach for modelling actual and future forest fire risk under climate change accounting water resources attenuation role. Sustainability 11(24):7166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang D-Y (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95(3):649–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chopra A, Garg D (2011) Behavior patterns of quality cost categories. The TQM Journal

  • Cian F, Villiers E, Archer J, Pitorri F, Freeman K (2014) Use of Six Sigma Worksheets for assessment of internal and external failure costs associated with candidate quality control rules for an ADVIA 120 hematology analyzer. Vet Clin Pathol 43(2):164–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cossu R, Raga R, Rossetti D (2003) The PAF model: an integrated approach for landfill sustainability. Waste Manag 23(1):37–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford CM (1992) The hidden costs of accelerated product development. J Prod Innov Manage 9(3):188–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crespo D, Albiac J, Kahil T, Esteban E, Baccour S (2019) Tradeoffs between water uses and environmental flows: a hydroeconomic analysis in the Ebro Basin. Water Resour Manage 33(7):2301–2317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui F, Park C, Kim M (2019) Application of curve-fitting techniques to develop numerical calibration procedures for a river water quality model. J Environ Manage 249:109375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dožić S (2019) Multi-criteria decision making methods: Application in the aviation industry. J Air Transp Manage 79:101683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dožić S, Lutovac T, Kalić M (2018) Fuzzy AHP approach to passenger aircraft type selection. J Air Transp Manage 68:165–175. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Gafy I, Apul D (2021) Expanding the Dynamic Modeling of Water-Food-Energy Nexus to Include Environmental, Economic, and Social Aspects Based on Life Cycle Assessment Thinking. Water Resour Manage 35(13):4349–4362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Sayed ME (2020) Nanoadsorbents for water and wastewater remediation. Sci Total Environ 739:139903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glogovac M, Filipovic J, Zivkovic N, Jeremic V (2019) A model for prioritization of improvement opportunities based on quality costs in the process interdependency context. Eng Econ 30(3):278–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulden C, Rawlins L (1995) A hybrid model for process quality costing. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

  • Gutiérrez E, Magnusson M (2014) Dealing with legitimacy: A key challenge for Project Portfolio Management decision makers. Int J Project Manage 32(1):30–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He G, Chai J, Qin Y, Xu Z, Li S (2020) Coupled model of variable fuzzy sets and the analytic hierarchy process and its application to the social and environmental impact evaluation of dam breaks. Water Resour Manage 34(9):2677–2697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heddam S (2016) Secchi Disk Depth Estimation from Water Quality Parameters: Artificial Neural Network versus Multiple Linear. Regres Models? Environ Processes 3(2):525–536. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-016-0144-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch V, Reimann P, Mitschang B (2020) Incorporating Economic Aspects into Recommendation Ranking to Reduce Failure Costs. Procedia CIRP 93:747–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho W, Xu X, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):16–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holota T, Hrubec J, Kotus M, Holienčinová M, Čapošová E (2016) The management of quality costs analysis model. Serbian J Manage 11(1):119–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishizaka A, Siraj S (2018) Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods. Eur J Oper Res 264(2):462–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaiswal R, Ghosh NC, Lohani A, Thomas T (2015) Fuzzy AHP based multi crteria decision support for watershed prioritization. Water Resour Manage 29(12):4205–4227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juran JM, De Feo JA (2010) Juran’s quality handbook: the complete guide to performance excellence. McGraw-Hill Education

  • Juran JM, Gryna FM (1974) Quality control handbook. McGraw Hill

  • Kahraman C, Cebeci U, Ulukan Z (2003) Multi-criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics information management

  • Kumar R, Kansara S (2018) Information technology barriers in Indian sugar supply chain: an AHP and fuzzy AHP approach. Benchmarking: An International Journal 25(7):1978–1991. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-01-2017-0004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Eckert CM, Earl C (2020) A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements.Expert Systems with Applications,113738

  • Mahmood S, Kureshi NI (2014) Reducing hidden internal failure costs in road infrastructure projects by determination of Cost of Poor Quality, a case study. Paper presented at the 2014 International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE)

  • Modak M, Pathak K, Ghosh KK (2017) Performance evaluation of outsourcing decision using a BSC and Fuzzy AHP approach: A case of the Indian coal mining organization. Resour Policy 52:181–191. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohseni M, Moosavian SF, Hajinezhad A (2022) Feasibility evaluation of an off-grid solar‐biomass system for remote area electrification considering various economic factors. Energy Science & Engineering

  • Moktadir A, Rahman T, Jabbour CJC, Mithun Ali S, Kabir G (2018) Prioritization of drivers of corporate social responsibility in the footwear industry in an emerging economy: A fuzzy AHP approach. J Clean Prod 201:369–381. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moosavian SF, Borzuei D, Zahedi R, Ahmadi A (2022a) Evaluation of research and development subsidies and fossil energy tax for sustainable development using computable general equilibrium model. Energy Science & Engineering

  • Moosavian SF, Zahedi R, Hajinezhad A (2022b) Economic, environmental and social impact of carbon tax for Iran: A computable general equilibrium analysis. Energy Sci Eng 10(1):13–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omar MK, Murgan S (2014) An improved model for the cost of quality. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

  • Ramdeen C, Santos J, Chatfield HK (2007) Measuring the cost of quality in a hotel restaurant operation. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management

  • Saaty TL (1988) What is the analytic hierarchy process? Mathematical models for decision support. Springer, pp 109–121

  • Schiffauerova A, Thomson V (2006) A review of research on cost of quality models and best practices. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management

  • Shokoohi M, Tabesh M, Nazif S, Dini M (2017) Water quality based multi-objective optimal design of water distribution systems. Water Resour Manage 31(1):93–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun C-C (2010) A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst Appl 37(12):7745–7754. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.04.066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toan TD (2016) Water pricing policy and subsidies to irrigation: A review. Environ Processes 3(4):1081–1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ture H, Dogan S, Kocak D (2019) Assessing Euro 2020 strategy using multi-criteria decision making methods: VIKOR and TOPSIS. Soc Indic Res 142(2):645–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y, Xu L, Solangi YA (2020) Strategic renewable energy resources selection for Pakistan: Based on SWOT-Fuzzy AHP approach. Sustainable Cities and Society 52:101861. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu F-l, Fang C-l, Zhao Y-p (2011) PAF model of study on urban industrial agglomeration dynamic mechanism and patterns. Geographical Res 29(1):71–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Yadav G, Desai TN (2017) A fuzzy AHP approach to prioritize the barriers of integrated Lean Six Sigma. Int J Qual Reliab Manage 34(8):1167–1185. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-01-2016-0010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yaghoubirad M, Azizi N, Ahmadi A, Zarei Z, Moosavian SF (2022) Performance assessment of a solar PV module for different climate classifications based on energy, exergy, economic and environmental parameters. Energy Rep 8:68–84. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.05.100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaree M, Javadi S, Neshat A (2019) Potential detection of water resources in karst formations using APLIS model and modification with AHP and TOPSIS. J Earth Syst Sci 128(4):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou J-L, Xu Q-Q, Zhang X-Y (2018) Water resources and sustainability assessment based on group AHP-PCA method: a case study in the Jinsha River Basin. Water 10(12):1880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziolkowska JR (2015) Is desalination affordable?—Regional cost and price analysis. Water Resour Manage 29(5):1385–1397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zyoud SH, Fuchs-Hanusch D (2020) An integrated decision-making framework to appraise water losses in municipal water systems. Int J Inform Technol Decis Mak 19(05):1293–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding resources were used in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of New Science and Technologies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Seyed Farhan Moosavian

  2. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran

    Daryoosh Borzuei

  3. Faculty of New Technologies, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran

    Abolfazl Ahmadi

Authors
  1. Seyed Farhan Moosavian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daryoosh Borzuei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Abolfazl Ahmadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Seyed Farhan Moosavian: Writing - Original Draft, Conceptualization, Methodology, Software - Daryoosh Borzuei: Writing - Original Draft, Software, Formal analysis, Investigation, Supervision - Abolfazl Ahmadi: Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Supervision, Resources, Validation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daryoosh Borzuei.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

  1. 1)

    This material is the authors’ own original work, which has not been previously published elsewhere.

  2. 2)

    The paper is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.

  3. 3)

    The paper reflects the authors’ own research and analysis in a truthful and complete manner.

  4. 4)

    The paper properly credits the meaningful contributions of co-authors and co-researchers.

  5. 5)

    The results are appropriately placed in the context of prior and existing research.

  6. 6)

    All sources used are properly disclosed (correct citation). Literally copying of text must be indicated as such by using quotation marks and giving proper reference.

  7. 7)

    All authors have been personally and actively involved in substantial work leading to the paper, and will take public responsibility for its content.

Competing Interests

Not applicable.

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent to Publish

The Authors hereby consent to the publication of the Work in the journal of water resource management.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moosavian, S.F., Borzuei, D. & Ahmadi, A. Cost Analysis of Water Quality Assessment Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach. Water Resour Manage 36, 4843–4862 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03281-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-022-03281-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation