Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

ISSN 2095-2201

ISSN 2095-221X(Online)

CN 10-1013/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-973

2018 Impact Factor: 3.883

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.    2015, Vol. 9 Issue (2) : 288-297    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0642-4
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Operating mechanism and set pair analysis model of a sustainable water resources system
Chaoyang DU1,2, Jingjie YU1(), Huaping ZHONG3, Dandan WANG1,2
1. Institute of Geography Science and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3. Nanjing Hydraulic Research Institute, Nanjing 210029, China
 Download: PDF(168 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

There is no alternative to the world’s water resources, and their increasing scarcity is making it difficult to meet the world population’s water needs. This paper presents a sustainable water resources system (SWRS) and analyzes the operating mechanism that makes it possible to evaluate the status of such a system. A SWRS can be described as a complex coupling system that integrates water resources, social, economic and ecological systems into a whole. The SWRS’s operating mechanism is composed of dynamic, resistance and coordination components, and it interacts with and controls the system’s evolution process. The study introduces a new approach, set pair analysis theory, to measure the state of a SWRS, and an evaluation index system is established using the subsystems and operating mechanism of a SWRS. The evaluation index system is separated into three levels (goal level, criteria level and index level) and divides the index standard into five grades. An evaluation model of the SWRS based on set pair analysis theory is constructed, and an example of SWRS evaluation in Shanghai is presented. The connection degrees of the index in the three levels are calculated, and the connection degree of the goal index is calculated to be 0.342, which classifies the city’s SWRS condition as grade 2. The sustainable use of water resources in the region is determined to be at a relatively adequate level that meets the requirements of sustainable development.
Keywords sustainable water resources system      operating mechanism      set pair analysis model      Shanghai     
Corresponding Author(s): Jingjie YU   
Online First Date: 18 February 2014    Issue Date: 13 February 2015
 Cite this article:   
Chaoyang DU,Jingjie YU,Huaping ZHONG, et al. Operating mechanism and set pair analysis model of a sustainable water resources system[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(2): 288-297.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-014-0642-4
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2015/V9/I2/288
Fig.1  Interaction and relationship between subsystems in the SWRS
Fig.2  Schematic of a SWRS’s operating mechanism
goal level (A) criteria level (B) index level (C) unit
SWRS condition B1: water resources condition C11: mean annual precipitation mm
C12: per capita local water resources m3
C13: per capita cross-border water resources m3
C14: water resources per unit area m3
B2: water resources utilization condition C21: rate of water resources development and utilization %
C22: industry water reuse rate %
C23: per capita daily water consumption L·(p·d)−1
C24: per capita industrial water consumption m3·p−1
C25: irrigation amount per unit area m3·hm−2
B3: socio-economic condition C31: gross domestic product (GDP) per capita CNY·p−1
C32: population density p·km−2
C33: urbanization rate %
C34: water consumption of industrial added of ten thousand ¥ CNY·m−3
B4: ecological environment condition C41: per capita public green space m2·p−1
C42: waste water treatment rate %
C43: river length ratio for water with a grade better than 3 %
C44: groundwater recharge rate %
Tab.1  SWRS index system
index grade 1
(excellent)		 grade 2
(good)		 grade 3
(medium)		 grade 4
(poor)		 grade 5
(very poor)		 index value
C11/mm 1200 1000 800 600 400 1171.7
C12/m3 5000 3000 2000 1000 500 173.7
C13/m3 30000 15000 8000 4000 2000 45981.6
C14/m3 1000 800 600 400 200 1676.2
C21/% 20 30 40 50 60 1.2
C22/% 90 70 50 30 20 82.4
C23/(L·(p·d)−1) 100 120 150 180 200 117
C24/(m3·p−1) 800 600 500 300 100 676.1
C25/(m3·hm−2) 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7935
C31/(CNY·p−1) 65000 55000 40000 30000 15000 76074
C32/(p·km−2) 500 1000 1500 2000 5000 3632
C33/% 90 70 50 30 20 88.9
C34/m3 50 70 90 120 150 131
C41/(m2·p−1) 30 20 10 6 3 13.0
C42/% 90 70 50 30 10 81.9
C43/% 80 60 40 30 10 23.5
C44/% 60 50 40 30 20 96.0
Tab.2  Evaluation grades and index values
B1 B2 B3 B4 eigenvector (ω)
B1 1 1/2 2 1/2 0.193
B2 2 1 3 2 0.417
B3 1/2 1/3 1 1/2 0.121
B4 2 1/2 2 1 0.269
Tab.3  Pairwise comparison matrix
index ω index ω index ω
B1 0.193 C14 0.133 C32 0.283
B2 0.417 C21 0.423 C33 0.076
B3 0.121 C22 0.167 C34 0.489
B4 0.269 C23 0.233 C41 0.25
C11 0.267 C24 0.109 C42 0.25
C12 0.533 C25 0.067 C43 0.25
C13 0.067 C31 0.152 C44 0.25
Tab.4  Index weights of criteria and index levels
rm1 rm2 rm3 rm4 rm5
μ11 0.859 0.142 0 0 0
μ12 0 0 0 0 1
μ13 1 0 0 0 0
μ14 1 0 0 0 0
μ21 1 0 0 0 0
μ22 0.62 0.38 0 0 0
μ23 0.15 0.85 0 0 0
μ24 0.381 0.619 0 0 0
μ25 0 0 0 0 1
μ31 1 0 0 0 0
μ32 0 0 0 0.684 0.316
μ33 0.943 0.057 0 0 0
μ34 0 0 0.38 0.62 0
μ41 0 0.3 0.7 0 0
μ42 0.595 0.405 0 0 0
μ43 0 0 0 0.675 0.325
μ44 0.802 0.198 0 0 0
μ1 0.429 0.038 0 0 0.533
μ2 0.603 0.329 0 0 0.067
μ3 0.224 0.004 0.186 0.497 0.089
μ4 0.349 0.226 0.175 0.169 0.081
Tab.5  Connection degrees of indices in the index and criteria levels
μ1 μ2 μ3 μ4 μ
value −0.086 0.700 −0.1121 0.2965 0.342
grade 3 1 3 2 2
Tab.6  Values of the connection degrees and grades
1 J D Durand. Historical estimates of world population: an evaluation. Population and Development Review, 1977, 3(3): 253–296
https://doi.org/10.2307/1971891
2 E G Means, N West, R Patrick. Population growth and climate change will pose tough challenges for water utilities. Journal- American Water Works Association, 2005, 97(8): 40–53
3 K S Jun, E S Chung, J Y Sung, K S Lee. Development of spatial water resources vulnerability index considering climate change impacts. Science of the Total Environment, 2011, 409(24): 5228–5242
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.08.027
4 W Wei, P J Shi, J J Zhou, H C Feng, X F Wang, X P Wang. Environmental suitability evaluation for human settlements in an arid inland river basin: a case study of the Shiyang River Basin. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2013, 23(2): 331–343
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-013-1013-y
5 J Morrison, M Morikawa, M Murphy, P Schulte. Water Scarcity & Climate Change: Growing Risks for Businesses & Investors. A Ceres Report, 2009, 3–6.
6 G H Brundtland. Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987
7 S Y Feng. The Water Resources System Engineering. Wuhan: Hubei Science and Technology Press, 1991 (in Chinese)
8 M C Chaturvedi, D K Srivastava. Study of a complex water resources system with screening and simulation models. Water Resources Research, 1981, 17(4): 783–794
9 D P Loucks. Quantifying trends in system sustainability. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 1997, 42(4): 513–530
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626669709492051
10 C Cocklin, G Blunden. Sustainability, water resources and regulation. Geoforum, 1998, 29(1): 51–68
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(97)00017-1
11 P Wouters, Clarke A Rieu-. Sustainability criteria for water resource systems. Resources Policy, 2001, 27(2): 139–140
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4207(00)00047-7
12 Solis S Sandoval-, D C McKinney, D P Loucks. Sustainability index for water resources planning and management. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 2011, 137(5): 381–390
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000134
13 D P Loucks. Sustainability Criteria for Water Resource Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999
14 Z X Xu, K Takeuchi, H Ishidaira, X W Zhang. Sustainability analysis for Yellow River water resources using the system dynamics approach. Water Resources Management, 2002, 16(3): 239–261
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020206826669
15 H J Fowler, C G Kilsby, P E O'Connell. Modeling the impacts of climatic change and variability on the reliability, resilience and vulnerability of a water resource system. Water Resources Research, 2003, 39(8): 1222–1232
16 I L Khranovich. Stability of functioning of water resource systems. Water Resources, 2007, 34(5): 485–495
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0097807807050016
17 Y Li, B J Lence. Estimating resilience for water resources systems. Water Resources Research, 2007, 43(7) W074227
https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005636 pmid: 20300476
18 G Yang, X L He, J F Li. The evaluation method study for water resources sustainable utilization in arid areas. International Journal of Chemical Engineering and Applications, 2010, 1(4): 359–362
https://doi.org/10.7763/IJCEA.2010.V1.62
19 F Shilling, A Khan, R Juricich, V Fong. Using Indicators to Measure Water Resources Sustainability in California. Cincinnati: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress, 2013, 2708–2715
20 E Smith. Water resources criteria and indicators. Water Resources Update, 2004, 127: 59–67
21 H M Wang. Theory and Method on Sustainable Development System of Basin. Nanjing: Hohai University Press, 2000 (in Chinese)
22 A Melloul, M Collin. The principal components statistical method as a complementary approach to geochemical methods in water quality factor identification; application to the coastal plain aquifer of Israel. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 1992, 140(1–4): 49–73
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(92)90234-M
23 Y M Tian, X R Lv, Y H Cui. Evaluation of water resources value based on fuzzy comprehensive method. In: International Conference on Energy and Environment Technology (ICEET 2009), Guilin. Guilin: IEEE COMPUTER SOC, 2009, 549–552
24 L Guo, X P Gao, H F Song. Study on Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation Method to Determine Safety Grade of Water Resources. In: Progress in Safety Science and Technology 2006, Changsha. Beijing: Science Press, 2006, 1483–1488
25 G B Kingston, M F Lambert, H R Maier. Bayesian training of artificial neural networks used for water resources modeling. Water Resources Research, 2005, 41(12): W12409
https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004152
26 K Q Zhao. Set Pair Analysis and its Preliminary Application. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Science and Technology Press, 2000, 4–8, 83–88(in Chinese)
27 H M Peterson, J L Nieber, R Kanivetsky. Water resources sustainability indicator. application of the watershed characteristics approach. Water Resources Management, 2013, 27(5): 1221–1234
28 S B Song, H J Cai. Assessment methods and indicator systems for sustainable use of regional water resources. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Water-Saving Agriculture and Sustainable Use of Water and Land Resources 2003, Yangling. Yangling: Water Saving Agriculture and Sustainable Use of Water and Land Resources, 2003, 677–682
29 W S Wang, J L Jin, J Ding, Y Q Li. A new approach to water resources system assessment–set pair analysis method. Science in China Series E: Technological Sciences, 2009, 52(10): 3017–3023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-009-0099-z
30 B Srdjevic. Linking analytic hierarchy process and social choice methods to support group decision-making in water management. Decision Support Systems, 2007, 42(4): 2261–2273
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2006.08.001
31 R G Coyle. A Mission-orientated approach to defense planning. Defense Analysis, 1989, 5(4): 353–367
32 X H Yang, X J Zhang, X X Hu, Z F Yang, J Q Li. Nonlinear optimization set pair analysis model (NOSPAM) for assessing water resource renewability. Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 2011, 18(5): 599–607
https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-18-599-2011
[1] Caihong Xu, Jianmin Chen, Zhikai Wang, Hui Chen, Hao Feng, Lujun Wang, Yuning Xie, Zhenzhen Wang, Xingnan Ye, Haidong Kan, Zhuohui Zhao, Abdelwahid Mellouki. Diverse bacterial populations of PM2.5 in urban and suburb Shanghai, China[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2021, 15(3): 37-.
[2] Shikang TAO, Xinning WANG, Hong CHEN, Xin YANG, Mei LI, Lei LI, Zhen ZHOU. Single particle analysis of ambient aerosols in Shanghai during the World Exposition, 2010: two case studies[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng Chin, 2011, 5(3): 391-401.
[3] WANG Xiangrong, YONG Yi, ZHANG Hao, WANG Pingjian, WANG Shoubing, CHEN Weizhen, WANG Shixiong, HO Hing Hon. On eco-planning for an eco-demonstration park (EDP) and sustainability[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2008, 2(2): 178-186.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed