Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dual-Interval Two-Stage Optimization for Flood Management and Risk Analyses

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, a dual interval two-stage restricted-recourse programming (DITRP) method is developed for flood-diversion planning under uncertainty. Compared with other conventional methods, DITRP improves upon them by addressing system uncertainties with complex presentations and incorporating subjective information within its optimization framework. Uncertainties in DITRP can be represented as probability distributions and intervals. In addition, the dual-interval concept is presented when the available information is highly uncertain for boundaries of intervals. Moreover, decision makers’ attitudes towards system risk can be reflected using a restricted-resource measure by controlling the variability of the recourse cost. The method has been applied to a case study of flood management. The results indicate that reasonable solutions for planning flood management practice have been generated which are related to decisions of flood-diversion. Several policy scenarios are analyzed, assisting in gaining insight into the tradeoffs between risk and cost.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmed S, Sahinidis NV (1998) Robust process planning under uncertainty. Ind Eng Chem Res 37(5):1883. doi:10.1021/ie970694t

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai D, Carpenter TJ, Mulvey JM (1997) Making a case for robust models. Manage Sci 43:895–907. doi:10.1287/mnsc.43.7.895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbaro A, Bagajewicz MJ (2004) Managing financial risk in planning under uncertainty. Process Syst Eng 50(5):963–989

    Google Scholar 

  • Beraldi P, Musmanno R, Triki C (1998) Solving optimal power dispatch via stochastic linear programming with restricted recourse. Technical report, Department of Electronics, Informatics and Systems, University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

  • Beraldi P, Grandinetti L, Musmanno R, Triki C (2000) Parallel algorithms to solve two-stage stochastic linear programs with robustness constrains. Parallel Comput 26:1889–1908. doi:10.1016/S0167-8191(00)00057-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birge JR, Louveaux FV (1997) Introduction to stochastic programming. Springer, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung RK, Chen CY (1998) A two-stage stochastic network model and solution methods for the dynamic empty container allocation problem. Transp Sci 32(2):142–162. doi:10.1287/trsc.32.2.142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung RKM, Powel WB (2000) Shape-A stochastic hybrid approximation procedure for two-stage stochastic programs. Oper Res 48(1):73. doi:10.1287/opre.48.1.73.12452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai L, Chen CH, Birge JR (2000) Convergence properties of two-stage stochastic programming. J Optim Theory Appl 106:489–509. doi:10.1023/A:1004649211111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darby-Dowman K, Barker S, Audsley E, Parsons D (2000) A two-stage stochastic programming with recourse model for determining robust planting plans in horticulture. J Oper Res Soc 51:83–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edirisinghe NCP, Ziemba WT (1994) Bounds for two-stage stochastic programs with fixed resources. Math Oper Res 19:292–313. doi:10.1287/moor.19.2.292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eiger G, Shamir U (1991) Optimal operation of reservoirs by stochastic programming. Eng Optim 17:293–312. doi:10.1080/03052159108941077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eppen GD, Martin RK, Schrage L (1989) A scenario approach to capacity planning. Oper Res 37:517. doi:10.1287/opre.37.4.517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FEMA (2002) Reducing risk through mitigation. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC, USA

  • Huang GH, Loucks DP (2000) An inexact two-stage stochastic programming model for waster resources management under uncertainty. Civ Eng Environ Syst 17:95–118. doi:10.1080/02630250008970277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang GH, Baetz BW, Partry GG (1992) A grey linear programming approach for municipal solid waste management planning under uncertainty. Civ Eng Syst 9:319–335. doi:10.1080/02630259208970657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang GH, Baetz BW, Partry GG (1995) Grey integer programming: an application to waste management planning under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res 83:594–620. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(94)00093-R

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Infanger G (1994) Planning under uncertainty: solving large-scale stochastic linear programs. Boyd and Fraser, Danvers, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Joslyn C (2003) Multi-interval elicitation of random intervals for engineering reliability analysis. In: 2003 Int. Symp. on Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis (ISUMA 03). University of Maryland, USA

  • Kall P (1979) Computational methods for solving two-stage stochastic linear programming problems. Z Angew Math Phys 30:261–271. doi:10.1007/BF01601939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kall P, Wallace SW (1994) Stochastic programming. Wiley, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Koppol APR, Bagajewicz MJ (2003) Financial risk management in the design of water utilization systems in process plants. Ind Eng Chem Res 42:5249–5255. doi:10.1021/ie0203882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouwenberg R, Zenios SA (2001) Stochastic programming models for asset liability management. Technical report, HERMES Center of Excellence on Computational Finance & Economics, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

  • Laguna M (1998) Applying robust optimization to capacity expansion of one location in telecommunications with demand uncertainty. Manage Sci 44:S101–S110. doi:10.1287/mnsc.44.11.S101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langewisch AT, Choobineh FF (2004) Mean and variance bounds and propagation for ill-specified random variables. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A 34(4):494–506. doi:10.1109/TSMCA.2004.826316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loucks DP, Stedinger JR, Haith DA (1981) Water resources systems planning and analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo B, Maqsood I, Yin YY, Huang GH, Cohen SJ (2003) Adaptation to climate change through water trading under uncertainty—an inexact two-stage nonlinear programming approach. J Environ Inform 2(2):58–68. doi:10.3808/jei.200300022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lustig IJ, Mulvey JM, Carpenter TJ (1991) Formulating two-stage stochastic programs for interior point methods. Oper Res 39:757–763. doi:10.1287/opre.39.5.757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malcolm SA, Zenios SA (1994) Robust optimization of power systems capacity expansion under uncertainty. J Oper Res Soc 45:1040–1049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maqsood I (2004) Development of simulation- and optimization-based decision support methodologies for environmental systems management. PhD Dissertation, University of Regina

  • McCray AW (1975) Petroleum evaluations and economic decisions. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Mobasheri F, Harboe RC (1970) A two-stage optimization model for design of a multipurpose reservoir. Water Resour Res 6(1):22–31. doi:10.1029/WR006i001p00022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulvey JM, Vanderbei RJ, Zenios SA (1995) Robust optimization of large-scale systems. Oper Res 43:264. doi:10.1287/opre.43.2.264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Needham JT, Watkins DW Jr, Lund JR, Nanda SK (2000) Linear programming for flood control in the Iowa and Des Moines rivers. J Water Resour Plan Manage 126(3):118–127. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2000)126:3(118)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen JR, Beling PA, Lambert JH (2000) Dynamic models for floodplain management. J Water Resour Plan Manage 126(3):167–171. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2000)126:3(167)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prekopa A (1995) Stochastic programming. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall D, Cleland L, Kuehne CS, Buzz GW, Sheer DP (1997) A water supply planning simulation model using mixed-integer linear programming “engine”. J Water Resour Plan Manage 123(2):116–124. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1997)123:2(116)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruszczynski A, Swietanowski A (1997) Accelerating the regularized decomposition method for two-stage stochastic linear problems. Eur J Oper Res 101:328–342. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(96)00401-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen S (1993) Subgradient decomposition and differentiability of the recourse function of a two stage stochastic linear program. Oper Res Lett 13:143–148. doi:10.1016/0167-6377(93)90003-Y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan K, Neelakantan TR, Narayan P (1999) Mixed-integer programming model for reservoir performance optimization. J Water Resour Plan Manage 125(5):298–301. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1999)125:5(298)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takriti S, Ahmed S (2004) On robust optimization of two-stage systems. Math Program Ser A 99:109–126. doi:10.1007/s10107-003-0373-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uryasev S, Pardalos PM (2001) Stochastic optimization: algorithm and applications. Kluwer, Norwell, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Vladimirou H, Zenios SA (1997) Stochastic linear programs with restricted recourse. Eur J Oper Res 101:177. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(95)00370-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang D, Adams BJ (1986) Optimization of real-time reservoir operations with Markov decision processes. Water Resour Res 22:345–352. doi:10.1029/WR022i003p00345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang XH, Du CM (2003) An internet based flood warning system. J Environ Inform 2:48–56. doi:10.3808/jei.200300017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windsor JS (1981) Model for the optimal planning of structural flood control systems. Water Resour Res 17(2):289–292. doi:10.1029/WR017i002p00289

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Systems Engineering Program, Faculty of Engineering, University of Regina, Regina, Sask, S4S 0A2, Canada

    ZhenFang Liu & GuoHe Huang

  2. Center of Energy and Environmental Systems Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing, 102206, China

    GuoHe Huang

Authors
  1. ZhenFang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. GuoHe Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to GuoHe Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, Z., Huang, G. Dual-Interval Two-Stage Optimization for Flood Management and Risk Analyses. Water Resour Manage 23, 2141–2162 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-008-9375-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-008-9375-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation