Analysing Water Resources Alternatives and Handling Criteria by Multi Criterion Decision Techniques

Abstract

In this paper, a hydro-ecological management problem is analyzed by means of multi criterion decision-making (MCDM) techniques. The MCDM techniques used are (1) preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluations (PROMETHEE-I, II), (2) geometrical analysis for interactive assistance (GAIA), (3) multi criterion Q-analysis (MCQA-I, II, III), (4) compromise programming (CP) and (5) cooperative game theory (CGT). An Austrian case study is presented to illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of the methods. The aim is to identify the so-called satisfactory water resources projects being designed at the Austrian part of Danube river. Moreover, handling of criteria in MCDM is discussed. Criteria analysis is important to understand the structure of the problem and also, in case of large criterion sets, a preference order on the criteria may help to determine the redundant and less important criteria in terms of discriminating power on the alternatives. GAIA and MCQA-III appear to be the only methods among the ones used that enable an analysis of the discriminating power of each criterion. In this paper, some modifications of the indices used in MCQA-III are proposed and shown to perform better in ranking criteria than earlier ones. It has been also shown that the use of two principal components in GAIA analysis might lead to misinterpretation of the real problem. In our case study, there are 12 alternatives and 33 criteria. The criteria consists of mainly three conflicting types of interest: economic, ecological and sociological. The alternatives include the construction of several hydropower plants as well as a national park. The comparison of the results show that there is not really a substantial ranking difference between the methods.