Skip to main content
Log in

Planning for agricultural return flow allocation: application of info-gap decision theory and a nonlinear CVaR-based optimization model

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A new methodology is proposed for sizing the required infrastructures for water and waste load allocation in river systems receiving return flow from agricultural networks. A nonlinear optimization model with a constraint based on conditional value at risk (CVaR) is developed to provide water and waste load allocation policies. The CVaR-based constraint limits the probabilistic losses due to existing uncertainties in available surface water. The deep uncertainties of return flow simulation model parameters, which have significant impacts on the simulated quantity and quality of agricultural return flows, are handled by using the info-gap theory. Total dissolved solid (TDS) is selected as water quality indicator and diverting a fraction of return flows to evaporation ponds is considered to control the TDS load of agricultural waste load dischargers. Quantity and TDS load of agricultural return flows over a 1-year cultivation period are simulated by using a calibrated SWAP agro-hydrological model. The results of many runs of SWAP model for different combinations of important uncertain parameters in their ranges of variations provide some response (impact) matrixes which are used in optimization model. The applicability of the proposed methodology is illustrated by applying it to the PayePol region in the Karkheh River catchment, southwest Iran. The selected strategy for water and waste load allocation in the study area is expected to provide total annual benefit of 48.64 million US dollars, while 7.84 million m3 of total return flow should be diverted to evaporation ponds. The results support the effectiveness of the methodology in incorporating existing deep uncertainties associated with agricultural water and waste load allocation problems.

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

Access this article

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-juaidi A (2017) Decision support system analysis with the graph model on non-cooperative generic water resource conflicts. International Journal of Engineering & Technology 6(4):145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allam A, Tawfik A, Yoshimura C and Fleifle A (2016) Multi-objective models of waste load allocation toward a sustainable reuse of drainage water in irrigation. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(12):11823–11834

  • Andersson F and Uryasev S (1999) Credit risk optimization with conditional value-at-risk criterion. Research Report No. 99-9, University of Florida

  • Artzner P, Delbaen F, Eber JM, Heath D (1999) Coherent measures of risk. Math Financ 9(3):203–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Haim Y (2004) Uncertainty, probability and information-gaps. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 85(1):249–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Haim Y (2005) Value-at-risk with info-gap uncertainty. The Journal of Risk Finance 6(5):388–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett SJ, Bishop TF, Vervoort RW (2013) Using swap to quantify space and time related uncertainty in deep drainage model estimates: a case study from northern NSW, Australia. Agric Water Manag 130:142–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burn DH, McBean EA (1986) Linear stochastic optimization applied to biochemical oxygen demand-dissolved oxygen modeling. Can J Civ Eng 13(2):249–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang NB, Chen HW, Shaw DG, Yang CH (1997) Water pollution control in river basin by interactive fuzzy interval multi-objective programming. J Environ Eng 123(12):1208–1216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, He L, Guan Y, Lu H, Li J (2017) Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions and water-energy optimization for shale gas supply chain planning based on multi-level approach: case study in Barnett, Marcellus, Fayetteville, and Haynesville shales. Energy Convers Manag 134:382–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai T, Labadie JW (2001) River basin network model for integrated water quantity/quality management. J Water Resour Plan Manag 127(5):295–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong C, Tan Q, Huang GH, Cai YP (2014) A dual-inexact fuzzy stochastic model for water resources management and non-point source pollution mitigation under multiple uncertainties. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 18(5):1793–1803

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Droogers P, Torabi M, Akbari M, Pazira E (2001) Field-scale modeling to explore salinity problems in irrigated agriculture. Irrig Drain 50:77–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filippi C, Mansini R, Stevanato E (2017) Mixed integer linear programming models for optimal crop selection. Comput Oper Res 81:26–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghodsi SH, Kerachian R, Estalaki SM, Nikoo MR, Zahmatkesh Z (2016) Developing a stochastic conflict resolution model for urban runoff quality management: application of info-gap and bargaining theories. J Hydrol 533:200–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassanli M, Ebrahimian H, Mohammadi E, Rahimi A, Shokouhi A (2016) Simulating maize yields when irrigating with saline water, using the AquaCrop, SALTMED, and SWAP models. Agric Water Manag 176:91–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He L, Chen Y, Zhao H, Tian P, Xue Y, Chen L (2018) Game-based analysis of energy-water nexus for identifying environmental impacts during shale gas operations under stochastic input. Sci Total Environ 627:1585–1601

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW, Ben-Haim Y (1999) Decision making in an uncertain world: information-gap modeling in water resources management. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev 29(4):506–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iran Water and Power Resources Development Company (2009) Systematic studies of Karkheh River basin: developing irrigation networks under water consumption studies

  • Kerachian R, Karamouz M (2005) Waste-load allocation model for seasonal river water quality management: application of sequential dynamic genetic algorithms. Scientia Iranica 12(2):117-130

  • Korteling B, Dessai S, Kapelan Z (2013) Using information-gap decision theory for water resources planning under severe uncertainty. Water Resour Manag 27(4):1149–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroes JG and van Dam JC (eds) (2003) Reference manual SWAP version 3.0.3, Wageningen, Alterra, Green World Research. Alterra-report 773, 211 pp

  • Kumar P, Sarangi A, Singh DK, Parihar SS, Sahoo RN (2015) Simulation of salt dynamics in the root zone and yield of wheat crop under irrigated saline regimes using SWAP model. Agric Water Manag 148:72–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li QQ, Li YP, Huang GH, Wang CX (2018) Risk aversion based interval stochastic programming approach for agricultural water management under uncertainty. Stoch Env Res Risk A 32(3):715–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu H, Du P, Chen Y, He L (2016) A credibility-based chance-constrained optimization model for integrated agricultural and water resources management: a case study in South Central China. J Hydrol 537:408–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu H, Li J, Ren L, Chen Y (2018) Optimal groundwater security management policies by control of inexact health risks under dual uncertainty in slope factors. Chemosphere 198:161–173

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mahab Ghodss Consulting Engineering Company (2008) Final project report on preventing, controlling and declining pollution in Karkheh River

  • Mahjouri N, Abbasi MR (2015) Waste load allocation in rivers under uncertainty: application of social choice procedures. Environ Monit Assess 187(2):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maringanti C, Chaubey I, Arabi M, Engel B (2011) Application of a multi-objective optimization method to provide least cost alternatives for NPS pollution control. Environ Manag 48(3):448–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matrosov ES, Woods AM, Harou JJ (2013) Robust decision making and info-gap decision theory for water resource system planning. J Hydrol 494:43–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesbah SM, Kerachian R, Torabian A (2010) Trading pollutant discharge permits in rivers using fuzzy nonlinear cost functions. Desalination 250(1):313–317

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mostafazadeh-Fard B, Mansouri H, Mousavi SF, Feizi M (2008) Application of SWAP model to predict yield and soil salinity for sustainable agriculture in an arid region. Int J Sustain Dev Plan 3(4):334–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikoo MR, Kerachian R, Karimi A (2012) A nonlinear interval model for water and waste load allocation in river basins. Water Resour Manag 26(10):2911–2926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nikoo MR, Beiglou PHB, Mahjouri N (2016) Optimizing multiple-pollutant waste load allocation in rivers: an interval parameter game theoretic model. Water Resour Manag 30:4201–4220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noory H, van der Zee SEATM, Liaghat AM, Parsinejad M, van Dam JC (2011) Distributed agro-hydrological modeling with SWAP to improve water and salt management of the Voshmgir irrigation and drainage network in northern Iran. Agric Water Manag 98:1062–1070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piantadosi J, Metcalfe AV, Howlett PG (2008) Stochastic dynamic programming (SDP) with a CVaR criterion for management of storm-water. J Hydrol 348:320–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockafellar RT, Uryasev S (1999) Optimization of conditional value at risk. Journal of Risk 2:21–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockafellar RT, Uryasev S (2002) Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. J Bank Financ 26:1443–1471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samipour F, Rabie M, Mohammadi K, Mahdian MH and Naseri AA (2010) Evaluation of two drainage models in south-west Iran. 9th International Drainage Symposium, Québec City, Canada

  • Sarwar A, Feddes RA (2000) Evaluating drainage design parameters for the fourth drainage project, Pakistan by using SWAP model: part II—modeling results. Irrig Drain Syst 14(4):281–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarwar A, Bastiaanssen WGM, Boers TM, Van Dam JC (2000) Devaluating drainage design parameters for the fourth drainage project, Pakistan by using SWAP model: part I—calibration. Irrig Drain Syst 14(4):257–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shafiei M, Ghahraman B, Saghafian B, Davary K, Pande S, Vazifedoust M (2014) Uncertainty assessment of the agro-hydrological SWAP model application at field scale: a case study in a dry region. Agric Water Manag 146:324–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao LG, Qin XS, Xu Y (2011) A conditional value-at-risk based inexact water allocation model. Water Resour Manag 25:2125–2145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh R (2004) Simulations on direct and cyclic use of saline waters for sustaining cotton–wheat in a semi-arid area of north-west India. Agric Water Manag 66:153–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soltani M, Kerachian R (2018) Developing a methodology for real-time trading of water withdrawal and waste load discharge permits in rivers. J Environ Manag 212:311–322

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soltani M, Kerachian R, Nikoo MR, Noory H (2016) A conditional value at risk-based model for planning agricultural water and return flow allocation in river systems. Water Resour Manag 30(1):427–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli A, Kerachian R, Nikoo MR, Soltani M, Estalaki SM (2014) Water and waste load allocation in rivers with emphasis on agricultural return flows: application of fractional factorial analysis. Environ Monit Assess 186(9):5935–5949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli A, Nikoo MR, Kerachian R, Soltani M (2015) River water quality management considering agricultural return flows: application of a nonlinear two-stage stochastic fuzzy programming. Environ Monit Assess 187(4):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webby RB, Adamson PT, Boland J, Howlett PG, Metcalfe AV, Piantadosi J (2007) The Mekong-applications of value at risk (VaR) and conditional value at risk (CVaR) simulation to the benefits, costs and consequences of water resources development in a large river basin. Ecol Model 20I:89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamout MG, Hatfield K, Romeijn HE (2007) Comparison of new conditional value-at-risk-based management models for optimal allocation of uncertain water supplies. Water Resour Res 43:W07430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yandamuri SR, Srinivasan K, Murty Bhallamudi S (2006) Multiobjective optimal waste load allocation models for rivers using nondominated sorting genetic algorithm-II. J Water Resour Plan Manag 132(3):133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reza Kerachian.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Philippe Loubet

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Soltani, M., Kerachian, R., Nikoo, M.R. et al. Planning for agricultural return flow allocation: application of info-gap decision theory and a nonlinear CVaR-based optimization model. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25, 25115–25129 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2544-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2544-7

Keywords

Navigation