Multicriteria analysis applied to the management of urban pluvial waters

Araújo, Danniel Cláudio de; Silva, Pedro Oliveira da; Curi, Wilson Fadlo; Cabral, Jaime Joaquim da Silva Pereira

doi:10.1590/2318-0331.011716006

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Scientific/Technical Article • RBRH 22 • 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0331.011716006 copy

Multicriteria analysis applied to the management of urban pluvial waters

Análise multicriterial aplicada à gestão das águas pluviais urbanas

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

The urbanization process significantly changes natural drainage processes within a river basin, for instance with the increase of volume of rainwater drained superficially it also increases the peak flows of water bodies, degradation of the water quality, and the sediment generation, among others. Rainwater drainage management plays a key role in urban areas, becoming increasingly complex, involving not only hydrological and hydraulic aspects, but also environmental, social and health issues, as well as other technical and high costs issues. This complexity leads, increasingly, to the use of multicriteria analysis as a support for decision-making. To deal with this, this work aimed to apply a multicriteria analysis methodology, using PROMETHEE method, to issues of urban rainwater drainage. The results indicated that the application of multiparticipative decision making and multicriteria analysis to possible scenarios of hydraulic interventions is well suited to reality.

Keywords:
Rainwater management; Multicriteria analysis; Decision making

Verbal scale	Description	Numerical scale
Low	The alternative will not be contaminated by diffuse pollution.	0
Moderate	The alternative will not be contaminated by diffuse pollution if there are few interactions.	0.5
High	The alternative may be contaminated by diffuse pollution.	1

Verbal scale	Description	Numerical scale
Low	The alternative does not enhance the reuse of rainwater.	0
Moderate	The alternative includes the reuse of rainwater for some activities.	0.5
High	The alternative maximizes the reuse of rainwater for activities.	1

Verbal scale	Description	Numerical scale
Low	The alternative poses no risk to the health of society.	0
Moderate	The alternative may present a risk to the health of society.	0.5
High	The alternative presents a high risk to the health of society.	1

Verbal scale	Description	Numerical scale
Very high	The alternative will have a positive impact on the population.	1
High	The alternative will cause few positive impacts on the population.	0.75
Mode-rate	The alternative will have both a positive and negative impact on the population of the region involved.	0.5
Low	The alternative will have no impact on society at all.	0.25
Very low	The alternative will cause negative impacts on the population.	0

CRITERION		Weight
C1	Water quality	0.10
C2	Water reuse	0.10
C3	Health risks to the population	0.10
C4	Public acceptance	0.10
C5	Deployment Cost	0.30
C6	Peak Flow Reduction	0.30

Alternatives	Criteria
Alternatives	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6
Objective	Minimize	Maximize	Minimize	Maximize	Minimize	Maximize
A1	Low	High	Low	Very high	R$ 1,939,000.00	0.39
A2	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate	High	R$ 1,041,728.00	0.42
A3	High	Low	High	Moderate	R$ 289,950.31	0.57
A4	High	Low	High	Low	R$ 288,699.00	0

Ranking	Alternative	Q	Q⁺	Q^--
1^o	One basin detention reservoir	0.27	0.53	0.27
2^o	Detention in public places	0.13	0.57	0.43
3^o	Detention in batches	0.00	0.50	0.50
4^o	Greide elevation	–0.40	0.20	0.60

Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos Av. Bento Gonçalves, 9500, CEP: 91501-970, Tel: (51) 3493 2233, Fax: (51) 3308 6652 - Porto Alegre - RS - Brazil
E-mail: rbrh@abrh.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] E-mails: dannielclaudio@gmail.com (DCA), eng.pedroos@gmail.com (POS), wfcuri@gmail.com (WFC), jcabral@ufpe.br (JJSPC)

I: Usual Criterion gj(a) – gj(b) >0 → F(a,b) = 1 gj(a) – gj(b) ≤ 0 → F(a,b) = 0		IV: Level-Criterion gj(a) – gj(b)\| > p → F(a,b) = 1 q < \|gj(a) – gj(b)\| ≤ p → F(a,b) = 1/2 \|gj(a) – gj(b)\| ≤ q → F(a,b) = 0
II: Quasi-Criterion gj(a) – gj(b) > q → F(a,b) = 1 gj(a) – gj(b) ≤ q → F(a,b) = 0		V: Criterion with Linear Preference and Indifference Area \|gj(a) – gj(b)\| > p → F(a,b) = 1 q < \|gj(a) – gj(b)\| ≤ p → F(a,b) = (\|gj(a) – gj(b)\| – q)/(p – q) \|gj(a) – gj(b)\| ≤ q → F(a,b) = 0
III: Criterion With Linear Preference gj(a) – gj(b) > p → F(a,b) = 1 gj(a) – gj(b) ≤ p → F(a,b) = [g_j(a) – g_j(b)]/p gj(a) – gj(b) ≤ 0 → F(a,b) = 0		VI: Gaussian Criteria The standard deviation shall be fixed gj(a) – gj(b) >0 gj(a) – gj(b) ≤ 0 The preference increases a normal distribution