Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Earth Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Water resources availability has a significant impact on agricultural land-use planning, especially in a water shortage area such as North China. The random nature of available water resources and other uncertainties in an agricultural system present risk for land-use planning and may lead to undesirable decisions or potential economic loss. In this study, an inexact risk management model (IRM) was developed for supporting agricultural land-use planning and risk analysis under water shortage. The IRM model was formulated through incorporating a conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) constraint into an inexact two-stage stochastic programming (ITSP) framework, and could be used to control uncertainties expressed as not only probability distributions but also as discrete intervals. The measure of risk about the second-stage penalty cost was incorporated into the model so that the trade-off between system benefit and extreme expected loss could be analyzed. The developed model was applied to a case study in the Zhangweinan River Basin, a typical agricultural region facing serious water shortage in North China. Solutions of the IRM model showed that the obtained first-stage land-use target values could be used to reflect decision-makers’ opinions on the long-term development plan. The confidence level α and maximum acceptable risk loss β could be used to reflect decisionmakers’ preference towards system benefit and risk control. The results indicated that the IRM model was useful for reflecting the decision-makers’ attitudes toward risk aversion and could help seek cost-effective agricultural land-use planning strategies under complex uncertainties.

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

  • Andersson F, Mausser H, Rosen D, Uryasev S (2001). Credit risk optimization with conditional value-at-risk criterion. Math Program, 89(2): 273–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carneiro M C, Ribas G P, Hamacher S (2010). Risk management in the oil supply chain: a CVaR approach. Ind Eng Chem Res, 49(7): 3286–3294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang N B, Wen C G, Chen Y L, Yong Y C (1996). A grey fuzzy multiobjective programming approach for the optimal planning of a reservoir watershed, part A: theoretical development. Water Res, 30(10): 2329–2334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DRIZRA (Design and Research Institute of Zhangweinan River Administration) (2008). Management Policy and Operation Regulation Report of Yuecheng Reservoir

    Google Scholar 

  • EBCZR (Editorial Board of Chorography of Zhangweinan River) (2003). Chorography of Zhangweinan River. Tianjin: Tianjin Science & Technology Press

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Shishiny H (1988). A goal programming model for planning the development of newly reclaimed lands. Agric Syst, 26(4): 245–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glen J J, Tipper R (2001). A mathematical programming model for improvement planning in a semi-subsistence farm. Agric Syst, 70(1): 295–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo P, Huang G H, He L (2008). ISMISIP: an inexact stochastic mixed integer linear semi-infinite programming approach for solid waste management and planning under uncertainty. Stochastic Environ Res Risk Assess, 22(6): 759–775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang G H (1996). IPWM: an interval parameter water quality management model. Eng Optim, 26(2): 79–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang G H, Baetz B W, Patry G G (1994). Capacity planning for municipal solid waste management systems under uncertainty–a grey fuzzy dynamic programming (GFDP) approach. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 120: 132–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang G H, Li Y P, Xiao H N, Qin X S (2007). An inexact two-stage quadratic program for water resources planning. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 10(2): 99–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang G H, Loucks D P (2000). An inexact two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Civ Eng Environ Syst, 17(2): 95–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang Y, Chen X, Li Y P, Bao A M, Ma Y G (2012). A simulationbased two-stage interval-stochastic programming model for water resources management in Kaidu-Konqi watershed, China. Journal of Arid Land, 4(4): 390–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kira D, Kusy M, Rakita I (1997). A stochastic linear programming approach to hierarchical production planning. J Oper Res Soc, 48(2): 207–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li W, Li Y P, Li C H, Huang G H (2010). An inexact two-stage water management model for planning agricultural irrigation under uncertainty. Agric Water Manage, 97(11): 1905–1914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y P, Huang G H (2008). Interval-parameter two-stage stochastic nonlinear programming for water resources management under uncertainty. Water Resour Manage, 22(6): 681–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y P, Huang G H (2009). Two-stage planning for sustainable water quality management under uncertainty. J Environ Manage, 90(8): 2402–2413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y P, Huang G H, Nie S L (2006). An interval-parameter multi-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Adv Water Resour, 29(5): 776–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y P, Li W, Huang G H (2012). Two-stage inexact-probabilistic programming model for water quality management. Environ Eng Sci, 29(7): 1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Z, Huang G H, Zhang Y M, Li Y P (2013). Inexact two-stage stochastic credibility constrained programming for water quality management. Resour Conserv Recycling, 73: 122–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Lv X J, Qin X S, Guo H C, Yu Y J, Mao G Z (2007). An integrated GIS-based analysis system for land-use management of lake areas in urban fringe. Landsc Urban Plan, 82(4): 233–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu H W, Huang G H, Zhang Y M, He L (2012). Strategic agricultural land-use planning in response to water-supplier variation in a China’s rural region. Agric Syst, 108: 19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maqsood I, Huang G H, Yeomans J S (2005). An interval-parameter fuzzy two-stage stochastic program for water resources management under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res, 167(1): 208–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noyan N (2012). Risk-averse two-stage stochastic programming with an application to disaster management. Comput Oper Res, 39(3): 541–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piantadosi J, Metcalfe A V, Howlett P G (2008). Stochastic dynamic programming (SDP) with a conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) criterion for management of storm-water. J Hydrol (Amst), 348(3–4): 320–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin X S, Huang G H, Zeng G M, Chakma A, Huang Y F (2007). An interval-parameter fuzzy nonlinear optimization model for stream water quality management under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res, 180(3): 1331–1357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raju K S, Kumar D N (1999). Multi-criterion decision making in irrigation planning. Agric Syst, 62(2): 117–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockafellar R T, Uryasev S (2000). Optimization of conditional valueat-risk. Journal of Risk, 2(3): 21–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockafellar R T, Uryasev S (2002). Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. J Bank Finance, 26(7): 1443–1471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell S O, Campbell P F (1996). Reservoir operating rules with fuzzy programming. J Water Resour Plan Manage, 122(3): 165–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shakya K M, Leuschner W A (1990). A multiple objective land use planning model for Nepalese hills farms. Agric Syst, 34(2): 133–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao L G, Qin X S, Xu Y (2011). A conditional value-at-risk based inexact water allocation model. Water Resour Manage, 25(9): 2125–2145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suo M Q, Li Y P, Huang G H (2011). An inventory-theory-based interval-parameter two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management. Eng Optim, 43(9): 999–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner J M, Shamir U, Marks D H (1994). Containing groundwater contamination: planning models using stochastic programming with recourse. Eur J Oper Res, 77(1): 1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webby R B, Adamson P T, Boland J, Howlett P G, Metcalfe A V, 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 Modell, 201(1): 89–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Y, Qin X S (2010). Agricultural effluent control under uncertainty: an inexact double-sided fuzzy chance constrained model. Adv Water Resour, 33(9): 997–1014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamout G M, Hatfield K, Romeijn HE (2007). Comparison of new conditional value-at-risk-based management models for optimal allocation of uncertain water supplies. Water Resources Research, 43 (7): W07430

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Urban and Environmental Science, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, China

    Wei Li, Changchun Feng & Ming Liu

  2. College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, China

    Chao Dai

  3. Sino-Canada Resources and Environmental Research Academy, North China Electric Power University, Beijing, 102206, China

    Yongping Li

  4. School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China

    Chunhui Li

Authors
  1. Wei Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Changchun Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chao Dai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yongping Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chunhui Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ming Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Changchun Feng.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, W., Feng, C., Dai, C. et al. An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage. Front. Earth Sci. 10, 419–431 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation