Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Earth Science

ISSN 2095-0195

ISSN 2095-0209(Online)

CN 11-5982/P

Postal Subscription Code 80-963

2018 Impact Factor: 1.205

Front. Earth Sci.    2016, Vol. 10 Issue (3) : 419-431    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1
RESEARCH ARTICLE
An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage
Wei LI1, Changchun FENG1(), Chao DAI2, Yongping LI3, Chunhui LI4, Ming LIU1
1. College of Urban and Environmental Science, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
2. College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
3. Sino-Canada Resources and Environmental Research Academy, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
4. School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
 Download: PDF(604 KB)  
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
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 decision-makers’ 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.

Keywords agricultural land-use planning      risk management      CVaR      uncertainty      water shortage     
Corresponding Author(s): Changchun FENG   
Just Accepted Date: 16 September 2015   Online First Date: 10 October 2015    Issue Date: 20 June 2016
 Cite this article:   
Wei LI,Changchun FENG,Chao DAI, et al. An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2016, 10(3): 419-431.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/Y2016/V10/I3/419
1 F Andersson, H Mausser, D Rosen, S Uryasev (2001). Credit risk optimization with conditional value-at-risk criterion. Math Program, 89(2): 273–291
https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00011399
2 M C Carneiro, G P Ribas, S Hamacher (2010). Risk management in the oil supply chain: a CVaR approach. Ind Eng Chem Res, 49(7): 3286–3294
https://doi.org/10.1021/ie901265n
3 N B Chang, C G Wen, Y L Chen, Y C Yong (1996). A grey fuzzy multi-objective programming approach for the optimal planning of a reservoir watershed, part A: theoretical development. Water Res, 30(10): 2329–2334
https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(96)00124-8
4 DRIZRA (Design and Research Institute of Zhangweinan River Administration) (2008). Management Policy and Operation Regulation Report of Yuecheng Reservoir
5 EBCZR (Editorial Board of Chorography of Zhangweinan River) (2003). Chorography of Zhangweinan River. Tianjin: Tianjin Science & Technology Press
6 H El-Shishiny (1988). A goal programming model for planning the development of newly reclaimed lands. Agric Syst, 26(4): 245–261
https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-521X(88)90044-3
7 J J Glen, R Tipper (2001). A mathematical programming model for improvement planning in a semi-subsistence farm. Agric Syst, 70(1): 295–317
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(01)00029-4
8 P Guo, G H Huang, L He (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
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-007-0185-3
9 G H Huang (1996). IPWM: an interval parameter water quality management model. Eng Optim, 26(2): 79–103
https://doi.org/10.1080/03052159608941111
10 G H Huang, B W Baetz, G G Patry (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
11 G H Huang, Y P Li, H N Xiao, X S Qin (2007). An inexact two-stage quadratic program for water resources planning. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 10(2): 99–105
https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.200700104
12 G H Huang, D P Loucks (2000). An inexact two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Civ Eng Environ Syst, 17(2): 95–118
https://doi.org/10.1080/02630250008970277
13 Y Huang, X Chen, Y P Li, A M Bao, Y G Ma (2012). A simulation-based two-stage interval-stochastic programming model for water resources management in Kaidu-Konqi watershed, China. Journal of Arid Land, 4(4): 390–398
https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1227.2012.00390
14 D Kira, M Kusy, I Rakita (1997). A stochastic linear programming approach to hierarchical production planning. J Oper Res Soc, 48(2): 207–211
https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600340
15 W Li, Y P Li, C H Li, G H Huang (2010). An inexact two-stage water management model for planning agricultural irrigation under uncertainty. Agric Water Manage, 97(11): 1905–1914
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.07.005
16 Y P Li, G H Huang (2008). Interval-parameter two-stage stochastic nonlinear programming for water resources management under uncertainty. Water Resour Manage, 22(6): 681–698
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-007-9186-8
17 Y P Li, G H Huang (2009). Two-stage planning for sustainable water quality management under uncertainty. J Environ Manage, 90(8): 2402–2413
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.11.007
18 Y P Li, G H Huang, S L Nie (2006). An interval-parameter multi-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Adv Water Resour, 29(5): 776–789
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2005.07.008
19 Y P Li, W Li, G H Huang (2012). Two-stage inexact-probabilistic programming model for water quality management. Environ Eng Sci, 29(7): 1–13
20 Z Li, G H Huang, Y M Zhang, Y P Li (2013). Inexact two-stage stochastic credibility constrained programming for water quality management. Resour Conserv Recycling, 73: 122–132
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.01.008
21 Y Liu, X J Lv, X S Qin, H C Guo, Y J Yu, G Z Mao (2007). An integrated GIS-based analysis system for land-use management of lake areas in urban fringe. Landsc Urban Plan, 82(4): 233–246
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.02.012
22 H W Lu, G H Huang, Y M Zhang, L He (2012). Strategic agricultural land-use planning in response to water-supplier variation in a China’s rural region. Agric Syst, 108: 19–28
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2011.10.007
23 I Maqsood, G H Huang, J S Yeomans (2005). An interval-parameter fuzzy two-stage stochastic program for water resources management under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res, 167(1): 208–225
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2003.08.068
24 N Noyan (2012). Risk-averse two-stage stochastic programming with an application to disaster management. Comput Oper Res, 39(3): 541–559
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2011.03.017
25 J Piantadosi, A V Metcalfe, P G Howlett (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
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.10.007
26 X S Qin, G H Huang, G M Zeng, A Chakma, Y F Huang (2007). An interval-parameter fuzzy nonlinear optimization model for stream water quality management under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res, 180(3): 1331–1357
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.03.053
27 K S Raju, D N Kumar (1999). Multi-criterion decision making in irrigation planning. Agric Syst, 62(2): 117–129
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(99)00060-8
28 R T Rockafellar, S Uryasev (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk, 2(3): 21–41
29 R T Rockafellar, S Uryasev (2002). Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. J Bank Finance, 26(7): 1443–1471
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(02)00271-6
30 S O Russell, P F Campbell (1996). Reservoir operating rules with fuzzy programming. J Water Resour Plan Manage, 122(3): 165–170
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1996)122:3(165)
31 K M Shakya, W A Leuschner (1990). A multiple objective land use planning model for Nepalese hills farms. Agric Syst, 34(2): 133–149
https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-521X(90)90043-P
32 L G Shao, X S Qin, Y Xu (2011). A conditional value-at-risk based inexact water allocation model. Water Resour Manage, 25(9): 2125–2145
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-011-9799-9
33 M Q Suo, Y P Li, G H Huang (2011). An inventory-theory-based interval-parameter two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management. Eng Optim, 43(9): 999–1018
https://doi.org/10.1080/0305215X.2010.528412
34 J M Wagner, U Shamir, D H Marks (1994). Containing groundwater contamination: planning models using stochastic programming with recourse. Eur J Oper Res, 77(1): 1–26
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)90025-6
35 R B Webby, P T Adamson, J Boland, P G Howlett, A V Metcalfe, J Piantadosi (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
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.07.033
36 Y Xu, X S Qin (2010). Agricultural effluent control under uncertainty: an inexact double-sided fuzzy chance constrained model. Adv Water Resour, 33(9): 997–1014
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.06.002
37 G M Yamout, K Hatfield, HE Romeijn (2007). Comparison of new conditional value-at-risk-based management models for optimal allocation of uncertain water supplies. Water Resources Research, 43(7): W07430
[1] FES-15544-OF-FCC_suppl_1 Download
[1] Weisheng HOU, Qiaochu YANG, Xiuwen CHEN, Fan XIAO, Yonghua CHEN. Uncertainty analysis and visualization of geological subsurface and its application in metro station construction[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2021, 15(3): 692-704.
[2] Grey S. NEARING, Hoshin V. GUPTA. Ensembles vs. information theory: supporting science under uncertainty[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2018, 12(4): 653-660.
[3] S.R. FASSNACHT, K.S.J. BROWN, E.J. BLUMBERG, J.I. LÓPEZ MORENO, T.P. COVINO, M. KAPPAS, Y. HUANG, V. LEONE, A.H. KASHIPAZHA. Distribution of snow depth variability[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2018, 12(4): 683-692.
[4] Igor Appel. Uncertainty in satellite remote sensing of snow fraction for water resources management[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2018, 12(4): 711-727.
[5] D.M. HULTSTRAND, S.R. FASSNACHT. The sensitivity of snowpack sublimation estimates to instrument and measurement uncertainty perturbed in a Monte Carlo framework[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2018, 12(4): 728-738.
[6] C. DAI,W. SUN,Q. TAN,Y. LIU,W.T. LU,H.C. GUO. Risk management for sulfur dioxide abatement under multiple uncertainties[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2016, 10(1): 87-107.
[7] Yue LIU, Qiuming CHENG, Qinglin XIA, Xinqing WANG. The use of evidential belief functions for mineral potential mapping in the Nanling belt, South China[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2015, 9(2): 342-354.
[8] Ran WANG, Yin LI, Qian TAN. A review of inexact optimization modeling and its application to integrated water resources management[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2015, 9(1): 51-64.
[9] Cong DONG, Guohe HUANG, Qian TAN, Yanpeng CAI. Coupled planning of water resources and agricultural land-use based on an inexact-stochastic programming model[J]. Front Earth Sci, 2014, 8(1): 70-80.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed