IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i10p4616-d1658421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Objective Optimization and Allocation of Water Resources in Hancheng City Based on NSGA Algorithm and TOPSIS-CCDM Decision-Making Model

Author

Listed:
  • Hua Tian

    (College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
    Shaanxi Provincial Key Laboratory of Green Coal Development and Geological Guarantee, Xi’an 710054, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Chenyang Tian

    (College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Ruolin Zhang

    (College of Geology and Environment, Xi’an University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China)

Abstract

Intelligent algorithms and decision models are key tools for improving the efficiency and adaptability of multi-objective optimization and allocation, and for achieving sustainable utilization of water resources. This study takes Hancheng City as a case study to develop a water resource optimization allocation model based on economic, social, and ecological benefits, analyzing and predicting the supply and demand of conventional and unconventional water resources in the study area. The model is solved using the NSGA algorithm, and solutions are screened from the Pareto front using the TOPSIS-CCDM two-level decision model, with the RSR method used for comparative verification. The results show that the schemes II-2022-21 (water shortage of 17,802.35 m 3 /d, economic benefits of 21,019,556.17 yuan, pollutant emissions of 745.92 tons), II-2027-ACS (shortage of 14,098.76 m 3 /d, economic benefits of 29,401,252.75 yuan, emissions of 712.07 tons), and II-2032-ACS (shortage of 12,709.33 m 3 /d, economic benefits of 36,660,367.83 yuan, emissions of 700.96 tons) are in line with the water resource allocation planning for Hancheng City before 2035. These schemes not only meet the regional planning requirements but also maximize economic benefits while minimizing water shortages and pollutant emissions. The study finds that NSGA-II has an advantage in selecting more coordinated schemes, while NSGA-III focuses more on the selectivity of specific targets. Although the TOPSIS-CCDM model performs well in comprehensive evaluation, it also exposes limitations such as sensitivity to data fluctuations and high computational complexity. By developing and applying advanced optimization and decision models, this study provides a scientific water resource allocation scheme for Hancheng City, supporting the sustainable management of regional water resources, and offering a reference for future research in addressing data uncertainties and improving computational efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Hua Tian & Chenyang Tian & Ruolin Zhang, 2025. "Multi-Objective Optimization and Allocation of Water Resources in Hancheng City Based on NSGA Algorithm and TOPSIS-CCDM Decision-Making Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-29, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4616-:d:1658421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4616/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/10/4616/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aaron T. Wolf, 1999. "Criteria for equitable allocations: the heart of international water conflict," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 23(1), pages 3-30, February.
    2. Liang Chen & Xiaogang Wang & Mouchao Lv & Jing Su & Bo Yang, 2024. "Coupling Coordination and Spatial–Temporal Evolution of the Water–Land–Ecology System in the North China Plain," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    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. Hui Yang & Jingye Li & Stefan Sieber & Kaisheng Long, 2025. "Does Digital Village Construction Affect the Sustainable Intensification of Cultivated Land Use? Evidence from Rural China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-24, April.
    2. Lei Wang & Aifeng Lv, 2022. "Identification and Diagnosis of Transboundary River Basin Water Management in China and Neighboring Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Dagmawi Mulugeta Degefu & Zaiyi Liao & Weijun He & Liang Yuan & Min An & Zhaofang Zhang & Wu Xia, 2019. "The Impact of Upstream Sub-Basins’ Water Use on Middle Stream and Downstream Sub-Basins’ Water Security at Country-Basin Unit Spatial Scale and Monthly Temporal Resolution," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-12, February.
    4. Jisi Fu & Tianwei Lu & Bin Xu & Jieyu Li & Junwei Zhou & Bin Xiong & Zhongzheng He, 2024. "Water Resources Allocation in a Transboundary River Based on a Rubinstein Bargaining Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 38(2), pages 639-663, January.
    5. Soheila Zareie & Omid Bozorg-Haddad & Hugo A. Loáiciga, 2021. "A state-of-the-art review of water diplomacy," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 2337-2357, February.
    6. M Atwi & J S Chóliz, 2011. "A negotiated solution for the Jordan Basin," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(1), pages 81-91, January.
    7. Jiheun Kim & Yeonju Kim & Dong Hyeok Park & Tae-Woong Kim & Seung Beom Seo, 2025. "Scenario Neutral Based Multilateral Decision-Making Framework for Drought Management," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 39(4), pages 1503-1519, March.

    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:17:y:2025:i:10:p:4616-:d:1658421. 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.