Water Pollution Reduction: Reverse Combinatorial Auctions Modelling Supporting Decision-Making Processes

Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 448)


This paper presents a model that contributes to finding cost-effective solutions when making decisions about building wastewater treatment plants in the planning process defined in the Framework Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the European Council. The model is useful especially when construction and operation of joint wastewater treatment plants is possible for several (neighbouring) municipalities, where a huge number of theoretical coalitions is possible. The paper presents the model principles for one pollutant and for multiple pollutants, describes the CRAB software used for computing the optimal solutions and presents selected applications. It concludes that the computations can contribute directly to decision-making concerning environmental protection projects and also serve for calculating background models for economic laboratory experiments in the area.


environmental protection environmental management decision making CRAB software water pollution combinatorial auctions 


  1. 1.
    Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fiala, P., Kalčevová, J., Vraný, J.: CRAB – CombinatoRial Auction Body Software System. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications 3, 718–722 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Šauer, P., Dvořák, A., Fiala, P., Prášek, J.: Methodology for economic and environmental optimisation of reducing pollution in watercourses, University of Economics & Ministry of Agriculture, certificate no. 79469/2013-MZe, Prague (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cramton, P., Shoham, Y., Steinberg, R. (eds.): Combinatorial Auctions. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leyton-Brown, K., Pearson, M., Shoham, Y.: Towards a Universal Test Suite for Combinatorial Auction Algorithms. In: The Proceedings of ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC 2000) (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Balas, E.: An Additive Algorithm for Solving Linear Programs with Zero-one Variables. Operations Research 13, 517–546 (1965)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    XA: Linear Optimizer System (2003), (approached December 28, 2009)
  8. 8.
    Government Order of 29 January 2003 No 61/2003 Coll., on the indicators and values of permissible pollution of surface water and wastewater, mandatory elements of the permits for discharge of wastewater into surface water and into sewerage systems, and on sensitive areas (Czech Technological Norm; in Czech) (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    ČSN 75 6401 Sewage treatment plants for more than 500 of population equivalents. Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fiala, P., Šauer, P.: Application of Combinatorial Auctions on Allocation of Public Financial Support in the Area of Environmental Protection: Economic Laboratory Experiment. Politická ekonomie 59(3), 379–392 (2011) (in Czech)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Šauer, P., Fiala, P., Dvořák, A.: Environmental negotiation under information asymmetry: a laboratory experiment for coalitions of four parties. Actual Problems of Economics 154(4), 544–550 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soukopová, J., Struk, M.: Methodology for the efficiency evaluation of the municipal environmental protection expenditure. In: Hřebíček, J., Schimak, G., Denzer, R. (eds.) Environmental Software Systems. IFIP AICT, vol. 359, pp. 327–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Soukopova, J., Bakos, E.: Assessing the efficiency of municipal expenditures regarding environmental protection. In: Aravossis, K., Brebbia, C.A. (eds.) Environmental Economics and Investment Assessment III. Book Series: WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, vol. 131, pp. 107–119 (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Koontz, T.M., Johnson, E.M.: One size does not fit all: Matching breadth of stakeholder participation to watershed group accomplishments. Policy Sciences 37(2), 185–204 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Priscoli, J.D.: What is public participation in water resources management and why is it important? Water International 29(2), 221–227 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Slavikova, L., Jilkova, J.: Implementing the Public Participation Principle into Water Management in the Czech Republic: A Critical Analysis. Regional Studies 45(4), 545–557 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of EconomicsPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations