Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resolving Trans-Boundary Water Conflicts: Third-Party Mediation Using an Inverse Approach of GMCR Under Incomplete Preference Environments

  • Published:
Water Resources Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Trans-boundary water conflicts and the ensuing social security have become concerning issues. However, the existing studies regarding trans-boundary water management mainly focus on river basin countries while ignoring the important role of third-party mediation institutions in resolving water conflicts. Thus, river basin countries and third-party mediation institutions are the objects of this research, which focuses on the strategies and behavior of third-party mediation institutions that are significant in alleviating conflict situations and formulating sustainable trans-boundary water resource allocation plans. The factors that influence the decision-making of third-party mediation institutions are determined based on other decision makers’ (DMs’) known preferences. Therefore, according to the uncertainty theory and the cognitive preference model, a novel inverse problem model of the graph model for conflict resolution is constructed to obtain the required DM preference information in complex and uncertain conflicts. Then, the new proposed method is applied to trans-boundary water conflicts in the Lancang-Mekong River Basin to illustrate its correctness and practicality. The results show that (1) a third-party management institution can directly promote a win–win situation among all DMs by obtaining other DMs’ preferences; (2) effective supervision by a third party can promote all those involved to reach a stable state faster; and (3) third parties can promote sustainable trans-boundary water resource allocation. The proposed methods and analysis results offer decision-making support for third-party management institutions in trans-boundary water resource conflicts and provide a scientific basis for mediating similar water resource conflicts within and beyond China.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Materials

No data and materials was generated or analyzed during this study.

References

  • Bashar MA, Kilgour DM, Hipel KW (2012) Fuzzy preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20(4):760–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozóki S, Fülöp J, Rónyai L (2010) On optimal completion of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices. Math Comput Model 52(1):318–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai X (2008) Water stress, water transfer and social equity in Northern China—Implications for policy reforms. J Environ Manage 87(1):14–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang S, Qin W, Wang X (2018) Dynamic optimal strategies in transboundary pollution game under learning by doing. Physica A 490:139–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choo EU, Wedley WC (2004) A common framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices. Comput Oper Res 31(6):893–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong Y, Zhang G, Hong WC et al (2010) Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method. Decis Support Syst 49(3):281–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eslamian S, Parvizi S, Ostad-Ali-Askari K et al (2018) Water. In: Bobrowsky P, Marker B (eds) Encyclopedia of engineering geology. Encyclopedia of Earth Sciences Series. Springer, Cham

  • Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (1993) Interactive decision making: The graph model for conflict resolution. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1979) Solving complex conflicts. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9(12):805–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1984) Conflict analysis: models and resolution. North-Holland, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao X, Shen J, He W et al (2021) Spatial-temporal analysis of ecosystem services value and research on ecological compensation in Taihu Lake Basin of Jiangsu Province in China from 2005 to 2018. J Clean Prod 317:128241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghashghaie M, Eslami H, Ostad-Ali-Askari K (2022) Applications of time series analysis to investigate components of Madiyan-rood river water quality. Appl Water Sci 12(8):202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han Y, Xu H, Fang L et al (2022) An integer programming approach to solving the inverse graph model for conflict resolution with two decision makers. Group Decis Negot 31(1):23–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hao C, Yan D, Gedefaw M et al (2021) Accounting of rransboundary ecocompensation standards based on water quantity allocation and water quality control targets. Water Resour Manag 35(6):1731–1756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemmavanh C, Ye Y, Yoshida A (2010) Forest land use change at Trans-Boundary Laos-China Biodiversity Conservation Area. J Geogr Sci 20(6):889–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of rationality: Theory of metagames and political behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang Y, Ge B, Hipel KW et al (2023) Solving the inverse graph model for conflict resolution using a hybrid metaheuristic algorithm. Eur J Oper Res 305(2):806–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahsay TN, Kuik O, Brouwer R et al (2018) The transboundary mpacts of trade liberalization and climate change on the Nile Basin economies and water resource availability. Water Resour Manag 32(3):935–947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Hipel KW (2005) The graph model for conflict resolution: Past, present, and future. Group Decis Negot 14(6):441–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Hipel KW, Fang L (1987) The graph model for conflicts. Automatica 23(1):41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsara RA, Kilgour DM, Hipel KW (2015) Inverse approach to the graph model for conflict resolution. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 45(5):734–742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuang H, Bashar MA, Hipel KW et al (2015) Grey-based preference in a graph model for conflict resolution with multiple decision makers. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 45(9):1254–1267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash JF (1950) Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 36(1):48–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash JF (1951) Non-cooperative games. Ann Math 54(2):286–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostad-Ali-Askari K (2022) Investigation of meteorological variables on runoff archetypal using SWAT: basic concepts and fundamentals. Appl Water Sci 12(8):177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rêgo LC, Silva HV, Rodrigues CD (2021) Optimizing the cost of preference manipulation in the graph model for conflict resolution. Appl Math Comput 392:125729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakakibara H, Okada N, Nakase D (2002) The application of robustness analysis to the conflict with incomplete information. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev 32(1):14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahid MA, Boccardo P, Usman M et al (2017) Predicting peak flows in real time through event based hydrologic modeling for a trans-boundary river catchment. Water Resour Manag 31(3):793–810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi W, Yu X, Liao W et al (2013) Spatial and temporal variability of daily precipitation concentration in the Lancang River basin, China. J Hydrol 495:197–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tacconi L (2012) Redefining payments for environmental services. Ecol Econ 73:29–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tao L, Su X, Javed SA (2021) Inverse preference optimization in the graph model for conflict resolution based on the genetic algorithm. Group Decis Negot 30(5):1085–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1944) Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang D, Huang J, Xu Y (2023) Integrating intuitionistic preferences into the graph model for conflict resolution with applications to an ecological compensation conflict in Taihu Lake basin. Appl Soft Comput 135:110036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang D, Huang J, Xu Y et al (2022) Water–Energy–Food nexus evaluation using an inverse approach of the graph model for conflict resolution based on incomplete fuzzy preferences. Appl Soft Comput 120:108703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang D, Liu G, Xu Y (2024) Information asymmetry in the graph model of conflict resolution and its application to the sustainable water resource utilization conflict in Niangziguan Springs Basin. Expert Syst Appl 237:121409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang J, Hipel KW, Fang L et al (2018) Matrix representations of the inverse problem in the graph model for conflict resolution. Eur J Oper Res 270(1):282–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang J, Hipel KW, Fang L et al (2019) Behavioral analysis in the graph model for conflict resolution. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 49(5):904–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu Z, Xu H, Ke GY (2019) The strategy of third-party mediation based on the option prioritization in the graph model. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 28(4):399–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu L, Zhang Q, Shi X (2019) Stakeholders strategies in poverty alleviation and clean energy access: A case study of China’s PV poverty alleviation program. Energy Policy 135:111011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Y, Chen L, Rodriguez RM et al (2016) Deriving the priority weights from incomplete hesitant fuzzy preference relations in group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 99:71–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu S, Lu H (2018) An integrated model of water resources optimization allocation based on projection pursuit model – Grey wolf optimization method in a transboundary river basin. J Hydrol 559:156–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng Y, Li J, Cai Y et al (2019) A hybrid game theory and mathematical programming model for solving trans-boundary water conflicts. J Hydrol 570:666–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao L, Li C, Huang R et al (2013) Harmonizing model with transfer tax on water pollution across regional boundaries in a China’s lake basin. Eur J Oper Res 225(2):377–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was funded by The Belt and Road Special Foundation of The National Key Laboratory of Water Disaster Prevention (Grant No. 2022490711), The Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province, PR China (Grant No. ZR2023QA036), and The Doctoral Start-up Foundation of Yantai University (Grant No. SX22B42).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The National Key Laboratory of Water Disaster Prevention, Hohai University, Nanjing, 210098, People’s Republic of China

    Xiufen Gu

  2. School of Mathematics and Information Sciences, Yantai University, Yantai, 264005, People’s Republic of China

    Xiufen Gu

  3. College of Geography and Environmental Science, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou, 730070, People’s Republic of China

    Lailei Gu

  4. Business School, Hohai University, Nanjing, 211100, People’s Republic of China

    Dayong Wang

  5. Department of Agronomy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA

    Sajad Jamshidi

Authors
  1. Xiufen Gu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lailei Gu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dayong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sajad Jamshidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

X. Gu: Writing – original draft. L. Gu.: Software, Methodology. D. Wang: Revision, Supervision. S. Jamshidi: Writing – review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dayong Wang.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All analyses were based on previous published studies, thus no ethical approval and potential conflicts of interest, research involving human participants and/or animals.

Consent to Participate

All participants in this research agree to submit this manuscript to Water Resources Management Journal.

Consent to Publish

All participants in this research agree to publish in Water Resources Management Journal.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

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 (e.g. a society or other partner) 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

Gu, X., Gu, L., Wang, D. et al. Resolving Trans-Boundary Water Conflicts: Third-Party Mediation Using an Inverse Approach of GMCR Under Incomplete Preference Environments. Water Resour Manage 37, 6071–6088 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-023-03643-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-023-03643-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation