DMsan: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework and Package to Characterize Contextualized Sustainability of Sanitation and Resource Recovery Technologies

被引:5
作者
Lohman, Hannah A. C. [1 ]
Morgan, Victoria L. [2 ,3 ]
Li, Yalin [2 ,4 ]
Zhang, Xinyi [1 ]
Rowles, Lewis S. [2 ,5 ]
Cook, Sherri M. [6 ]
Guest, Jeremy S. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Newmark Civil Engn Lab 3221, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Urbana, IL 61801 USA
[2] Univ Illinois, Inst Sustainabil Energy & Environm, Urbana, IL 61801 USA
[3] Hazen & Sawyer, 2420 Lakemont Ave,Suite 325, Orlando, FL 32814 USA
[4] Univ Illinois, DOE Ctr Adv Bioenergy & Bioprod Innovat, Urbana, IL 61801 USA
[5] Georgia Southern Univ, Dept Civil Engn & Construct, 201 COBA Dr,BLDG 232, Statesboro, GA 30458 USA
[6] Univ Colorado Boulder, Dept Civil Environm & Architectural Engn, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
来源
ACS ENVIRONMENTAL AU | 2023年 / 3卷 / 03期
基金
比尔及梅琳达.盖茨基金会;
关键词
stakeholder engagement; sustainability assessment; location-specific; spatial analysis; multi-criteria; decision making (MCDM); non-sewered sanitation; source-separation; WATER TREATMENT PLANTS; WASTE-WATER; SELECTION; SYSTEMS; SLUDGE; ALTERNATIVES; AGRICULTURE; MANAGEMENT; CRITERIA; OPTIONS;
D O I
10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
In resource-limited settings, conventional sanitation systems often fail to meet their goals-with system failures stemming from a mismatch among community needs, constraints, and deployed technologies. Although decision-making tools exist to help assess the appropriateness of conventional sanitation systems in a specific context, there is a lack of a holistic decision-making framework to guide sanitation research, development, and deployment (RD&D) of technologies. In this study, we introduce DMsan-an open-source multi-criteria decision analysis Python package that enables users to transparently compare sanitation and resource recovery alternatives and characterize the opportunity space for early-stage technologies. Informed by the methodological choices frequently used in literature, the core structure of DMsan includes five criteria (technical, resource recovery, economic, environmental, and social), 28 indicators, criteria weight scenarios, and indicator weight scenarios tailored to 250 countries/territories, all of which can be adapted by end-users. DMsan integrates with the open-source Python package QSDsan (quantitative sustainable design for sanitation and resource recovery systems) for system design and simulation to calculate quantitative economic (via techno-economic analysis), environmental (via life cycle assessment), and resource recovery indicators under uncertainty. Here, we illustrate the core capabilities of DMsan using an existing, conventional sanitation system and two proposed alternative systems for Bwaise, an informal settlement in Kampala, Uganda. The two example use cases are (i) use by implementation decision makers to enhance decision-making transparency and understand the robustness of sanitation choices given uncertain and/or varying stakeholder input and technology ability and (ii) use by technology developers seeking to identify and expand the opportunity space for their technologies. Through these examples, we demonstrate the utility of DMsan to evaluate sanitation and resource recovery systems tailored to individual contexts and increase transparency in technology evaluations, RD&D prioritization, and context-specific decision making.
引用
收藏
页码:179 / 192
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
[41]   Assessing the sustainable development: A review of multi-criteria decision analysis for urban and architectural sustainability [J].
Mecca, Beatrice .
JOURNAL OF MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS, 2023, 30 (5-6) :203-218
[42]   Power generation expansion plan and sustainability in a developing country: A multi-criteria decision analysis [J].
Khan, Imran .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2019, 220 :707-720
[43]   Design of multi-criteria decision framework for supplier evaluation and supply chain sustainability risk (SCSR) management [J].
Holmes, Freddie ;
Shukla, Manish ;
Dhurkari, Ram Kumar .
BRITISH FOOD JOURNAL, 2025, 127 (05) :1730-1755
[44]   Evaluation of Groundwater Remediation Technologies Based on Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approaches [J].
Wang, Hao ;
Cai, Yanpeng ;
Tan, Qian ;
Zeng, Yong .
WATER, 2017, 9 (06)
[45]   Drivers and barriers to the adoption of decentralised renewable energy technologies: A multi-criteria decision analysis [J].
Aparisi-Cerda, I. ;
Ribo-Perez, D. ;
Garcia-Melon, M. ;
D'Este, P. ;
Poveda-Bautista, R. .
ENERGY, 2024, 305
[46]   Evaluating alternative technologies to diesel generation in India using multi-criteria decision analysis [J].
Singh, Ajit ;
Joshi, Amruta ;
Pope, Francis D. ;
Singh, Bhim ;
Khare, Mukesh ;
Kota, Sri Harsha ;
Radcliffe, Jonathan .
CLEANER ENERGY SYSTEMS, 2024, 9
[47]   Sustainability assessment and decision making of hydrogen production technologies: A novel two-stage multi-criteria decision making method [J].
Ren, Xusheng ;
Li, Weichen ;
Ding, Shimin ;
Dong, Lichun .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2020, 45 (59) :34371-34384
[48]   A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework Tool for the Selection of Farm Business Models on Organic Mountain Farms [J].
Pazek, K. ;
Rozman, C. ;
Bavec, F. ;
Borec, A. ;
Bavec, M. .
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, 2010, 34 (07) :778-799
[49]   Fuzzy Multi-actor Multi-criteria Decision Making for sustainability assessment of biomass-based technologies for hydrogen production [J].
Ren, Jingzheng ;
Fedele, Andrea ;
Mason, Marco ;
Manzardo, Alessandro ;
Scipioni, Antonio .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2013, 38 (22) :9111-9120
[50]   Multi-criteria decision analysis framework for engaging stakeholders in river pollution risk management [J].
Ngubane, Zesizwe ;
Bergion, Viktor ;
Dzwairo, Bloodless ;
Stenstrom, Thor Axel ;
Sokolova, Ekaterina .
SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01)