A comparative study of different methods of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) with spatial reference to select of suitable sites for treated wastewater of irrigated perimeters

• Published in: Sustainable water resources management Vol. 10; no. 4; p. 147
• Main Authors: Rihab, Riahi, Gannouni, Sonia, Rebai, Noamen
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 01.08.2024; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Analytic hierarchy process; Availability; Comparative analysis; Comparative studies; Decision analysis; Decision making; Development Economics; Earth and Environmental Science; Earth Sciences; Fuzzy logic; Geographical information systems; Hierarchies; Hydrogeology; Hydrology/Water Resources; Irrigation; Irrigation systems; Land use; Multiple criterion; Original Article; Qualitative analysis; Sensitivity analysis; Spatial analysis; Sustainable Development; Wastewater; Wastewater treatment; Water Policy/Water Governance/Water Management; GIS; Irrigation; AHP; Weighted sum; Fuzzy AHP; Wastewater
• ISSN: 2363-5037; 2363-5045
• DOI: 10.1007/s40899-024-01120-4

The objective of this study is to compare different methods of multi-criteria analysis with spatial reference for the classification of suitable sites for irrigation by treated wastewater in the region of Nabeul (Tunisia). The proposed modeling framework presents a rational decision-making process based on three multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques, including the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), weighted sum, weighted overlay, and fuzzy AHP, to make use of the benefits of several methods. The results from different models are compared to propose a straightforward and pragmatic operational decision tool. Several criteria of technical, environmental, social, and economic aspects have been identified, spatialized, weighted by peer comparison, and normalized according to logic functions. The results obtained showed that respectively for fuzzy AHP, weighted overlay, and weighted sum, [24.57/57.42/26.85]% of the study areas are recommended for irrigation by wastewater, [14.21/41.02/60.79]% are moderately recommended, and [61.21/1.54/12.34]% are not recommended. The validation study indicates that fuzzy AHP offers better results and provides a higher degree of confidence because the models and processes associated with creativity are related to high uncertainty. Indeed, this research needs qualitative judgments. A general sensitivity analysis of the GIS-based MCDM models was implemented to evaluate the criteria and their influence on the final model results. The most important factors for all three models were irrigation systems and the economy. Furthermore, the weighted sum model demonstrates a moderate sensitivity to land use, with a weight of 3%. Similarly, the AHP model shows a sensitivity of 8.28% to land use. In terms of cultural practices, both the fuzzy AHP and AHP models exhibit a moderate sensitivity. The fuzzy AHP model has a sensitivity of 10.67%, while the weighted overlay model has a sensitivity of 9.29%. This research confirms that the choice of MCDA method will depend on several factors, such as the complexity of the decision problem, data availability, decision-makers' preferences, and resources available to perform the necessary calculations. In some cases, it may even be wise to combine different methods or adapt their use based on the specificities of the decision problem.