IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitdm/v14y2015i01ns0219622014500862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CRIDE: A Case Study in Multi-Criteria Analysis for Decision-Making Support in Rainwater Harvesting

Author

Listed:
  • Sandra Lorena Galarza-Molina

    (Grupo de Investigación Ciencia e Ingeniería del Agua y el Ambiente, Facultad de Ingeniería, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Carrera 7 No. 40–62, Bogotá, Colombia;
    CeiBA-Complejidad, Cra. 1 Este # 18 a–70, Bogotá, Colombia)

  • Andrés Torres

    (Grupo de Investigación Ciencia e Ingeniería del Agua y el Ambiente, Facultad de Ingeniería, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Carrera 7 No. 40–62, Bogotá, Colombia)

  • Priscilla Moura

    (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Antônio Carlos, 6627, 31270–901, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil)

  • Jaime Lara-Borrero

    (Grupo de Investigación Ciencia e Ingeniería del Agua y el Ambiente, Facultad de Ingeniería, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Carrera 7 No. 40–62, Bogotá, Colombia)

Abstract

This paper aims to develop a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tool for rainwater harvesting (RWH) on a university campus in Bogota, Colombia. The specific type of MCDA our research proposes is known as CRIDE (multi-CRIteria DEcision support tool), which allows us to study various methods of RWH. In order to account for uncertainties such as the variability of expert opinions and imprecision stemming from the different criteria required, we have designed this tool to incorporate ELECTRE II and the Monte Carlo method. For this case study we apply a methodology that evaluates the performance of six RWH scenarios. These six input scenarios emerged from an ideal one, wherein all rainwater throughout the campus is successfully harvested and treated until potable. From there, reality sets in: the other five scenarios are varying degrees of deviance from the ideal one, both in terms of water quantity and quality. In regard to collection and treatment we used sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS). As for the evaluation of each of the scenarios, we outline eight criteria, which include hydraulic performance, compatibility with the University's Master Plan and financial aspects. Our research concludes that CRIDE as a means of support during the decision-making process generates a complete view of possible solutions, in addition to ranking these solutions. The CRIDE-based approach allows for the proposal of a methodology that evaluates the relevance of an established criteria set, using robustness, redundancy and sensitivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandra Lorena Galarza-Molina & Andrés Torres & Priscilla Moura & Jaime Lara-Borrero, 2015. "CRIDE: A Case Study in Multi-Criteria Analysis for Decision-Making Support in Rainwater Harvesting," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(01), pages 43-67.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitdm:v:14:y:2015:i:01:n:s0219622014500862
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219622014500862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219622014500862
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219622014500862?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Theodor J Stewart, 2005. "Dealing with Uncertainties in MCDA," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 445-466, Springer.
    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. Daniel A. Salas & Paulina Criollo & Angel D. Ramirez, 2021. "The Role of Higher Education Institutions in the Implementation of Circular Economy in Latin America," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Mihaela-Elena Ulmeanu & Cristian-Vasile Doicin & Paulina Spânu, 2021. "Comparative Evaluation of Sustainable Framework in STEM Intensive Programs for Secondary and Tertiary Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-33, January.

    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. Marcin Rabe & Dalia Streimikiene & Yuriy Bilan, 2019. "The Concept of Risk and Possibilities of Application of Mathematical Methods in Supporting Decision Making for Sustainable Energy Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, February.
    2. Catrinu, M.D. & Nordgård, D.E., 2011. "Integrating risk analysis and multi-criteria decision support under uncertainty in electricity distribution system asset management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(6), pages 663-670.
    3. Durbach, Ian N., 2014. "Outranking under uncertainty using scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 98-108.
    4. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    5. A. Psomas & I. Vryzidis & A. Spyridakos & M. Mimikou, 2021. "MCDA approach for agricultural water management in the context of water–energy–land–food nexus," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 689-723, March.
    6. Ram, Camelia, 2020. "Scenario presentation and scenario generation in multi-criteria assessments: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    7. Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "A comparison of simplified value function approaches for treating uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 456-464.
    9. Ioannou, Anastasia & Angus, Andrew & Brennan, Feargal, 2017. "Risk-based methods for sustainable energy system planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 602-615.
    10. Heinrich, G. & Basson, L. & Cohen, B. & Howells, M. & Petrie, J., 2007. "Ranking and selection of power expansion alternatives for multiple objectives under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 2350-2369.
    11. Haddad, M. & Sanders, D. & Tewkesbury, G., 2020. "Selecting a discrete multiple criteria decision making method for Boeing to rank four global market regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-15.
    12. Yan-Ping Jiang & Hai-Ming Liang & Minghe Sun, 2014. "A method based on the ideal and nadir solutions for stochastic MADM problems," Working Papers 0178mss, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    13. Mahdi Zarghami, 2010. "Urban Water Management Using Fuzzy-Probabilistic Multi-Objective Programming with Dynamic Efficiency," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(15), pages 4491-4504, December.
    14. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Anika Kaczynski, 2016. "Making Good Decisions in Healthcare with Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: The Use, Current Research and Future Development of MCDA," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 29-40, February.
    15. C Ram & G Montibeller & A Morton, 2011. "Extending the use of scenario planning and MCDA for the evaluation of strategic options," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(5), pages 817-829, May.
    16. Judy Lawrence & Robert Bell & Adolf Stroombergen, 2019. "A Hybrid Process to Address Uncertainty and Changing Climate Risk in Coastal Areas Using Dynamic Adaptive Pathways Planning, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis & Real Options Analysis: A New Zealand App," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    17. Angilella, Silvia & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2016. "Robust Ordinal Regression and Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis in multiple criteria hierarchy process for the Choquet integral preference model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 154-169.
    18. Yohannes Hagos Subagadis & Niels Schütze & Jens Grundmann, 2016. "A Fuzzy-Stochastic Modeling Approach for Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis of Coupled Groundwater-Agricultural Systems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(6), pages 2075-2095, April.
    19. Benjamin Trump & Christopher Cummings & Jennifer Kuzma & Igor Linkov, 2018. "A decision analytic model to guide early‐stage government regulatory action: Applications for synthetic biology," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 88-100, March.
    20. Mohammaddust, Faeghe & Rezapour, Shabnam & Farahani, Reza Zanjirani & Mofidfar, Mohammad & Hill, Alex, 2017. "Developing lean and responsive supply chains: A robust model for alternative risk mitigation strategies in supply chain designs," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(PC), pages 632-653.

    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:wsi:ijitdm:v:14:y:2015:i:01:n:s0219622014500862. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm/ijitdm.shtml .

    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.