IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i5p1260-d209479.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of Game Theory against Nature in the Assessment of Technical Solutions Used in River Regulation in the Context of Aquatic Plant Protection

Author

Listed:
  • Justyna Hachoł

    (Institute of Environmental Protection and Development, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, 50-363 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Elżbieta Bondar-Nowakowska

    (Institute of Environmental Protection and Development, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, 50-363 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Paweł S. Hachaj

    (Department of Water Engineering and Water Management, Cracow University of Technology, 31-155 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

The anthropogenic transformation of riverbeds causes a violation of the dynamic equilibrium of the river and its environment, threatening the ecological safety of aquatic ecosystems and dependent waters. However, the differing results of these transformations are dependent on many factors and it is difficult to determine them precisely before the works start. The designers and contractors of these works are dealing with the riverbed, which in terms of hydromorphological and biological features is variable, unique, and strongly diverse. Thus, decisions are followed by an unknown result concerning changes in the riverbed ecosystems. The aim of this study is to determine the suitability of game theory as a tool supporting decision-making in the design of regulatory works including ecological aspects, as well as an indication of a regulatory works model that would meet the expectations of water users while corresponding to environmentally friendly riverbed regulation. The analysis was made on the basis of observed changes in the number of species in aquatic plant vascular communities—one of the most important elements of a riverbed ecosystem. Using game theory, it is possible to create an effective tool for the design of regulatory works and decision-making process.

Suggested Citation

  • Justyna Hachoł & Elżbieta Bondar-Nowakowska & Paweł S. Hachaj, 2019. "Application of Game Theory against Nature in the Assessment of Technical Solutions Used in River Regulation in the Context of Aquatic Plant Protection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:5:p:1260-:d:209479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/5/1260/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/5/1260/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernhard Arnold & Ingrid Größl & Peter Stahlecker, 2002. "The Minimax, the Minimin, and the Hurwicz Adjustment Principle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 233-260, May.
    2. Jan K. Kazak & Jakub Chruściński & Szymon Szewrański, 2018. "The Development of a Novel Decision Support System for the Location of Green Infrastructure for Stormwater Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Wang, Lizhong & Fang, Liping & Hipel, Keith W., 2008. "Basin-wide cooperative water resources allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 190(3), pages 798-817, November.
    4. Wen, Meilin & Iwamura, Kakuzo, 2008. "Fuzzy facility location-allocation problem under the Hurwicz criterion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(2), pages 627-635, January.
    5. Shan Gao & Shuang Ling & Wenhui Liu, 2018. "The Role of Social Media in Promoting Information Disclosure on Environmental Incidents: An Evolutionary Game Theory Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    6. Vincenzo Torretta, 2014. "The Sustainable Use of Water Resources: A Technical Support for Planning. A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-21, November.
    7. Martin Beckenkamp, 2008. "Playing strategically against nature? – Decisions viewed from a game-theoretic frame," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2008_34, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    8. Erik Ansink & Arjan Ruijs, 2008. "Climate Change and the Stability of Water Allocation Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 249-266, October.
    9. Mariusz Krzak, 2013. "The Evaluation Of An Ore Deposit Development Prospect Through Application Of The "Games Against Nature" Approach," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 30(06), pages 1-18.
    10. Dayton-Johnson, Jeff, 2000. "Determinants of collective action on the local commons: a model with evidence from Mexico," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 181-208, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paweł Oglęcki & Piotr Sebastian Ostrowski & Marta Utratna-Żukowska, 2021. "Natural and Geomorphological Response of the Small Lowland River Valley for Anthropogenic Transformation," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mariusz Adynkiewicz-Piragas & Bartłomiej Miszuk, 2020. "Risk Analysis Related to Impact of Climate Change on Water Resources and Hydropower Production in the Lusatian Neisse River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Erik Ansink & Harold Houba, 2014. "The Economics of Transboundary River Management," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-132/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. Tesfaye Woldeyohanes & Arnim Kuhn & Thomas Heckelei & Lalisa Duguma, 2021. "Modeling Non-Cooperative Water Use in River Basins," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Zhang, Chenglong & Li, Xuemin & Guo, Ping & Huo, Zailin, 2021. "Balancing irrigation planning and risk preference for sustainable irrigated agriculture: A fuzzy credibility-based optimization model with the Hurwicz criterion under uncertainty," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    5. Hu, Zhineng & Chen, Yazhen & Yao, Liming & Wei, Changting & Li, Chaozhi, 2016. "Optimal allocation of regional water resources: From a perspective of equity–efficiency tradeoff," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 102-113.
    6. Hanan G. Jacoby & Ghazala Mansuri, 2018. "Governing the Commons? Water and Power in Pakistan’s Indus Basin," Working Papers id:12933, eSocialSciences.
    7. Lea Melnikovová, 2017. "Can Game Theory Help to Mitigate Water Conflicts in the Syrdarya Basin?," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 65(4), pages 1393-1401.
    8. Erik Ansink & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2012. "Sequential sharing rules for river sharing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(2), pages 187-210, February.
    9. Karsu, Özlem & Morton, Alec, 2015. "Inequity averse optimization in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 343-359.
    10. Alberto Alesina & Eliana La Ferrara, 2003. "Ethnic Diversity and Economic Performance," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 2028, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    11. Wang, S. & Huang, G.H., 2014. "An integrated approach for water resources decision making under interactive and compound uncertainties," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 32-40.
    12. Schultz, Bill, 2020. "Resource management and joint-planning in fragmented societies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    13. Kajisa, Kei & Palanisami, Kuppannan & Sakurai, Takeshi, 2006. "The Dissemination of Private Wells and Double Tragedies: The Overexploitation of Groundwater among Well Users and Increased Poverty among Non-Well Users in Tamil Nadu, India," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25682, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Mathias Zannakis & Sverker Molander & Lars-Olof Johansson, 2019. "On the Relationship between Pro-Environmental Behavior, Experienced Monetary Costs, and Psychological Gains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-14, October.
    15. Chunhua Xin & Xiufeng Lai, 2022. "Does the Environmental Information Disclosure Promote the High-Quality Development of China’s Resource-Based Cities?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-26, May.
    16. Catherine Bros & Mathieu Couttenier, 2010. "Untouchability and Public Infrastructure," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10074, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    17. Yasuyuki Sawada & Ryuji Kasahara & Keitaro Aoyagi & Masahiro Shoji & Mika Ueyama, 2013. "Modes of Collective Action in Village Economies: Evidence from Natural and Artefactual Field Experiments in a Developing Country," Asian Development Review, MIT Press, vol. 30(1), pages 31-51, March.
    18. Chunlong Li & Jianzhong Zhou & Shuo Ouyang & Chao Wang & Yi Liu, 2015. "Water Resources Optimal Allocation Based on Large-scale Reservoirs in the Upper Reaches of Yangtze River," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(7), pages 2171-2187, May.
    19. Ghazala Mansuri, 2004. "Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 1-39.
    20. Zhongwen Xu & Liming Yao & Yin Long, 2020. "Climatic Impact Toward Regional Water Allocation and Transfer Strategies from Economic, Social and Environmental Perspectives," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:5:p:1260-:d:209479. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.