Multi-criteria decision analysis framework for engaging stakeholders in river pollution risk management

被引:7
作者
Ngubane, Zesizwe [1 ]
Bergion, Viktor [2 ]
Dzwairo, Bloodless [1 ,3 ]
Stenstrom, Thor Axel [3 ]
Sokolova, Ekaterina [4 ]
机构
[1] Durban Univ Technol, Dept Civil Engn, ZA-3201 Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
[2] Chalmers Univ Technol, Dept Architecture & Civil Engn, S-41296 Gothenburg, Sweden
[3] Durban Univ Technol, Inst Water & Wastewater Technol, ZA-4000 Durban, South Africa
[4] Uppsala Univ, Dept Earth Sci, S-75105 Uppsala, Sweden
关键词
COST-BENEFIT-ANALYSIS; WATER-QUALITY; SYSTEMS; EXPERIENCES; CATCHMENT;
D O I
10.1038/s41598-024-57739-y
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Water pollution presents a substantial environmental challenge with extensive implications for water resources, ecosystem sustainability, and human health. Using a South African catchment, this study aimed to provide watershed managers with a framework for selecting best management practices (BMPs) to reduce pollution and the related risk to river users, while also including the perspectives of key catchment stakeholders. The framework encompassed the identification of and consultation with key stakeholders within the catchment. A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) methodology using the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique for Enhanced Stakeholder Take-up (SMARTEST) was used to identify and prioritise suitable BMPs in a case study. Decision alternatives and assessment criteria as well as their weights were derived based on stakeholder responses to a two-stage survey. Stakeholders included those utilising the river for domestic and recreational purposes, municipal representatives, scientists, NGOs, and engineers. The assessment of decision alternatives considered environmental, economic, and social criteria. The aggregated scores for decision alternatives highlighted the significance of involving stakeholders throughout the decision process. This study recommends the pairing of structural and non-structural BMPs. The findings provide valuable insights for catchment managers, policymakers, and environmental stakeholders seeking inclusive and effective pollution mitigation strategies in a catchment.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 61 条
[11]   Risk-based cost-benefit analysis for evaluating microbial risk mitigation in a drinking water system [J].
Bergion, Viktor ;
Lindhe, Andreas ;
Sokolova, Ekaterina ;
Rosen, Lars .
WATER RESEARCH, 2018, 132 :111-123
[12]   Human health risk assessment of metals and anions in surface water from a mineral coal region in Brazil [J].
Bonifacio, Alicia da Silva ;
Brum, Rodrigo de Lima ;
Tavella, Ronan Adler ;
Ramires, Paula Florencio ;
Lessa, Ingrid Medeiros ;
dos Santos, Marina ;
Rodrigues da Silva Junior, Flavio Manoel .
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT, 2021, 193 (09)
[13]  
Bray R., 2015, Int. J. Manag. Decis. Mak, V14, P66
[14]  
Brehm J.M., 2020, Appl Environ Educ Commun., DOI DOI 10.1080/1533015X.2020.1740117
[15]   Urbanisation, climate change and its impact on water quality and economic risks in a water scarce and rapidly urbanising catchment: case study of the Berg River Catchment [J].
Cullis, James D. S. ;
Horn, Annabel ;
Rossouw, Nico ;
Fisher-Jeffes, Lloyd ;
Kunneke, Marle M. ;
Hoffman, Willem .
H2OPEN JOURNAL, 2019, 2 (01) :146-167
[16]  
du Plessis A., 2023, South Africas water predicament: Freshwaters unceasing decline, P89, DOI [10.1007/978-3-031-24019-5_5, DOI 10.1007/978-3-031-24019-5_5]
[17]  
du Plessis A., 2019, Springer Water, P147, DOI [10.1007/978-3-030-03186-2_7, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-03186-2_7]
[18]  
DWAF, Water quality management series: A guide to stakeholder identification and involvement
[19]   SMARTS AND SMARTER - IMPROVED SIMPLE METHODS FOR MULTIATTRIBUTE UTILITY MEASUREMENT [J].
EDWARDS, W ;
BARRON, FH .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1994, 60 (03) :306-325
[20]   Multi-criteria decision analysis for nature conservation: A review of 20years of applications [J].
Esmail, Blal Adem ;
Geneletti, Davide .
METHODS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2018, 9 (01) :42-53