Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The application of multi-criteria (AHP-PROMETHEE) decision-making methods in selecting and prioritizing the green area irrigation resources

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the underlying factors in the conservation and development of urban green spaces is the available water resources use for green areas in each region. The primary purpose of this study is to introduce the integration of a proper simulation method for runoff along with AHP-PROMETHEE decision-making method for water resources management in urban basins. The application of this approach was investigated in the city Buin Zahra of Qazvin Province of Iran. In the first step by using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), the available water resources in the case study were weighted. In the second step, the water resources of the municipal and residential wells and water collected by precipitation and flooding were investigated to provide irrigation water. The Storm Water Management Model was applied to optimize water resources use from the flood as a solution to save potable water. The simulation was performed for precipitation with a return period of 5 and 10 years, for 6-h intervals. The simulation results were carried out for a total of 25 nodes, and the discharge was calculated, which is between 0.95 up to 1.2 cubic meters per second. The flow of the resulting discharge can feed the required water for green areas. Also, the available water resources in the case study were weighted by Expert Choice and were finally selected by using the Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE). The results indicated that residential wells had the priority in supplying irrigation water for green areas.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmad I, Verma MK (2018) Application of analytic hierarchy process in water resources planning: a GIS based approach in the identification of suitable site for water storage. Water Resour Manag 32:5093–5114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-018-2135-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmadi A, Abbaspour M, Afkhami Namin N (2020) Assessment of Iran academic environmental education needs with climate change approach. Int J Environ Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02850-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaponnière A, Boulet G, Chehbouni A, Arsmouk L (2007) Assessing hydrological processes under scarce data and complex environment. J Hydrol Process 22:1908–1921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dongquan Z, Jining C, Haozheng W et al (2009) GIS-based urban rainfall-runoff modeling using an automatic catchment-discretization approach: a case study in Macau. Environ Earth Sci 59:465–472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-009-0045-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farjoodi Ahangari A, Aghajani B, Shapoori B (2013) The use of multi criteria decision making methods in selecting suitable plant species to restore Sarnegoon copper mine. In: National Conference on Mineral Sciences. pp 1–10

  • Faye M, Vb Traore, Bop M, Al Et (2016) Hydrologic modeling in diass river basin using rainfall. Int J Recent Sci Res 6:7290–7295

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghodsi pour H (2012) Analysis of hierarchical process, vol 12. University of Tehran, Tehran, p 224 

  • Harken B, Chang CF, Dietrich P et al (2019) hydrogeological modeling and water resources management: improving the link between data, prediction, and decision making. Water Resour Res 55:10340–10357. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan CM (2010) Abiotic factor. In: Encycl. Earth. https://web.archive.org/web/20130608071757/http://www.eoearth.org/article/Abiotic_factor?topic=49461. Accessed 2 Jun 2020

  • Huber WC, Heaney JP, Medina MA, et al (1975) Storm Water Management Model User’S Manuel. Version Ii

  • Jeníček M (2006) Rainfall-runoff modelling in small and middle-large catchments—An overview. Geogr CGS 111:305–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang L, Chen Y, Wang H (2015) Urban flood simulation based on the SWMM model. IAHS-AISH Proc Reports 368:186–191. https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-368-186-2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones D, Tamiz M (2016) Multiple criteria decision analysis state of the art surveys, vol 233. Springer, TX, USA, pp 903–926

  • Karleuša B, Hajdinger A, Tadić L (2019) The application of multi-criteria analysis methods for the determination of priorities in the implementation of irrigation plans. Water Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11030501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Fu Q, Singh VP et al (2020) Managing agricultural water and land resources with tradeoff between economic, environmental, and social considerations: a multi-objective nonlinear optimization model under uncertainty. Agric Syst. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maharjan B, Pachel K, Loigu E (2017) Modelling stormwater runoff, quality, and pollutant loads in a large urban catchment. Proc Est Acad Sci 66:225. https://doi.org/10.3176/proc.2017.3.02

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mareschal B (2013) Visual PROMETHEE manual

  • Mutikanga HE, Sharma SK, Vairavamoorthy K (2011) Multi-criteria Decision Analysis: a Strategic Planning Tool for Water Loss Management. Water Resour Manag 25:3947–3969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-011-9896-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noori T (2005) Sensitivity analysis of multi—attribute decision—making problems. Tehran Univ 25–38

  • Ragab R, Prudhomme C (2002) Climate change and water resources management in arid and semi-arid regions: prospective and challenges for the 21st century. Biosyst Eng 81:3–34. https://doi.org/10.1006/bioe.2001.0013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossman LA (2006) Epa SWMM 5.0 Quality assurance report: Dynamic Wave Flow Routing

  • Rossman LA (2015) Storm Water Management Model User’s Manual Version 5.1

  • Saaty TL (2012) Decision making for leaders: the Analytic Hierarcy Process for Decisions in a Complex World. RWS Publications:University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA

  • Shahed Behrouz M, Zhu Z, Matott LS, Rabideau AJ (2020) A new tool for automatic calibration of the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). J Hydrol 581:124436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriyana I, De Gijt JG, Parahyangsari SK, Niyomukiza JB (2020) Watershed management index based on the village watershed model (VWM) approach towards sustainability. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 8:35–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2020.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thungngern J, Wijitkosum S, Sriburi T, Sukhsri C (2015) A review of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP): an approach to water resource management in Thailand. Appl Environ Res. https://doi.org/10.35762/aer.2015.37.3.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai LY, Chen CF, Fan CH, Lin JY (2017) Using the HSPF and SWMM models in a high pervious watershed and estimating their parameter sensitivity. Water Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9100780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tscheikner-Gratl F, Egger P, Rauch W, Kleidorfer M (2017) Comparison of multi-criteria decision support methods for integrated rehabilitation prioritization. Water Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9020068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA S (1986) Urban Hydrology for Small, vol 1. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, USA, p 164

  • Yang G, Guo P, Huo L, Ren C (2015) Optimization of the irrigation water resources for Shijin irrigation district in north China. Agric Water Manag 158:82–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We highly appreciate and acknowledge our colleagues at Sharif University of Technology (SUT) and Science and Research Branch of IAU (SRB-IAU) who shared their knowledge to upgrade this research work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

    A. Safari & A. H. Javid

  2. School of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

    M. Abbaspour

Authors
  1. A. Safari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Abbaspour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. H. Javid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Abbaspour.

Additional information

Editorial responsibility: Samareh Mirkia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Safari, A., Abbaspour, M. & Javid, A.H. The application of multi-criteria (AHP-PROMETHEE) decision-making methods in selecting and prioritizing the green area irrigation resources. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 18, 1135–1146 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02875-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-020-02875-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation