IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sph/rjedep/v1y2012i1p71-90.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision Making Support in Wastewater Management - Comparative analysis of techniques and tools used in centralized and decentralized system layouts, UDK 628.2

Author

Listed:
  • Harmony Musiyarira

    (Polytechnic of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia)

  • Cornelius Chris Reynders

    (University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa)

  • Prvoslav Marjanovic

    (3Educons University, SremskaKamenica, Serbia)

Abstract

Wastewater management has been seen primarily as a technical and economic issue but it is now recognised that these are some of the elements in an array of other factors that affect sustainability of wastewater systems. Literature studies point out that municipal authorities have a general and long-standing tradition of using indicators in monitoring performance, reviewing progress and reporting the state of the environment as part of the regulatory enacted compliance. However, they have neglected other critical aspects of use of these indicators such as their input into the planning and decision making process. This research advocates for the use of sustainable indicators in a context based planning approach and the utilisation of Multi Criteria Decision Aid (MCDA) in a two step approach for comparative analysis and assessment of the sustainability of wastewater systems. The overall objective was to develop a methodology for wastewater systems selection and to produce a practical planning tool to aid in decision making for municipalities. Another objective was to provide recommendations for wastewater and sanitation management improvement in the case study area. The methodology consisted of comprehensive literature review, case study analysis, a review of the Decision Support Systems (DSS) in use and the development of the DSS for Gauteng Province. The full spectrum of viable wastewater or sanitation options was incorporated into the DSS. From the sustainability assessments carried out using Multi criteria decision analysis, one result showed that varying degrees of sustainability are obtainable with each treatment technology involved and decentralised technologies appear more sustainable. Based on the local context and indicators used in this research, the DSS results suggest that land treatment systems, stabilisation ponds and ecological treatment methods are more sustainable. One major finding from literature is that no technology is inherently sustainable on its own but is a function of the local context specifics. Since there is so much variation in social and economic needs within the areas; the overall results imply that a differential wastewater management approach should be employed with tailor made solutions resulting for each municipality or certain areas within a municipality.

Suggested Citation

  • Harmony Musiyarira & Cornelius Chris Reynders & Prvoslav Marjanovic, 2012. "Decision Making Support in Wastewater Management - Comparative analysis of techniques and tools used in centralized and decentralized system layouts, UDK 628.2," Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, Alliance of Central-Eastern European Universities, vol. 1(1), pages 71-90, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sph:rjedep:v:1:y:2012:i:1:p:71-90
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jedep.spiruharet.ro/RePEc/sph/rjedep/Rev1_6Decision.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Munda, G. & Nijkamp, P. & Rietveld, P., 1994. "Qualitative multicriteria evaluation for environmental management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 97-112, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Touitou Mohammed, 2021. "Empirical Analysis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve for Economic Growth and CO2 Emissions in North African Countries," Econometrics. Advances in Applied Data Analysis, Sciendo, vol. 25(2), pages 67-77, June.
    2. Aydın, Cem İskender, 2020. "Nuclear energy debate in Turkey: Stakeholders, policy alternatives, and governance issues," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Ropke, Inge, 2005. "Trends in the development of ecological economics from the late 1980s to the early 2000s," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 262-290, November.
    4. Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & Peter Nijkamp, 1998. "Advances in Environmental Economics: Analysis and Modelling," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-094/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Cook, David & Proctor, Wendy, 2007. "Assessing the threat of exotic plant pests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 594-604, August.
    6. Mateo Cordier & José Pérez Agúndez & Walter Hecq & Bertrand Hamaide, 2013. "A guiding framework for ecosystem services monetization in ecological-economic modeling," Working Papers CEB 13-018, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Zepharovich, Elena & Ceddia, M. Graziano & Rist, Stephan, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation of land-use scenarios in the Chaco Salteño: Complementing the three-pillar sustainability approach with environmental justice," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    8. Gowdy, John M. & Ferreri Carbonell, Ada, 1999. "Toward consilience between biology and economics: the contribution of Ecological Economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 337-348, June.
    9. Andonegi, Aitor & Garmendia, Eneko & Aldezabal, Arantza, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation for managing biodiversity conservation conflicts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Daniele Guidi, 2011. "Sustainable Agriculture Enterprise: Framing Strategies to Support Smallholder Inclusive Value Chains for Rural Poverty Alleviation," CID Working Papers 53, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    11. Dunn, Elizabeth G. & Keller, James M. & Marks, Leonie A., 1996. "Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM): A Tool for Agricultural and Resource Economics," 1996 Annual Meeting, July 28-31, San Antonio, Texas 271481, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Amir Saffari & Mohammad Ataei & Farhang Sereshki & Mostafa Naderi, 2019. "Environmental impact assessment (EIA) by using the Fuzzy Delphi Folchi (FDF) method (case study: Shahrood cement plant, Iran)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 817-860, April.
    13. Michael B. Wironen & Robert V. Bartlett & Jon D. Erickson, 2019. "Deliberation and the Promise of a Deeply Democratic Sustainability Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    14. Xenarios, S. & Tziritis, I., 2007. "Improving pluralism in Multi Criteria Decision Aid approach through Focus Group technique and Content Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 692-703, May.
    15. Alessandro SCUDERI & Luisa STURIALE, 2016. "Multi-criteria evaluation model to face phytosanitary emergencies: The case of citrus fruits farming in Italy," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(5), pages 205-214.
    16. Cordier, Mateo & Pérez Agúndez, José A. & O'Connor, Martin & Rochette, Sébastien & Hecq, Walter, 2011. "Quantification of interdependencies between economic systems and ecosystem services: An input-output model applied to the Seine estuary," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1660-1671, July.
    17. Mateo Cordier & Martin O'Connor, 2012. "Comment le système économique intéragit-il avec les services écosystémiques intermédiaires: analyse input-output appliquée aux habitats marins de l'estuaire de la Seine," Working Papers hal-00911659, HAL.
    18. Cavallaro, Fausto & Ciraolo, Luigi, 2005. "A multicriteria approach to evaluate wind energy plants on an Italian island," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 235-244, January.
    19. Aslaksen, Iulie & Ingeborg Myhr, Anne, 2007. ""The worth of a wildflower": Precautionary perspectives on the environmental risk of GMOs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 489-497, January.
    20. Martinez-Alier, Joan & Munda, Giuseppe & O'Neill, John, 1998. "Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 277-286, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    centralized systems; decentralized systems; decision support systems; multi criteria decision analysis; sustainability;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sph:rjedep:v:1:y:2012:i:1:p:71-90. 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: Rocsana Bucea-Manea-Tonis (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://jedep.spiruharet.ro/ .

    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.