Advertisement

HHM- and RFRM-Based Water Resource System Risk Identification

  • Qiuxiang Jiang
  • Tian Wang
  • Zilong Wang
  • Qiang Fu
  • Zhimei Zhou
  • Youzhu Zhao
  • Yujie Dong
Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

In water resource system risk research, the risk identification problem should be addressed first, due to its significant impact on risk evaluation and management. Conventional risk identification methods are static and one-sided and are likely to induce problems such as ignored risk sources and ambiguous relationships among sub-systems. Hierarchical holographic modelling (HHM) and Risk filtering, ranking, and management (RFRM) were employed to identify the risk of water resources system. Firstly, water resource systems are divided into 11 major hierarchies and 39 graded holographic sub-subsystems by using the HHM framework. Iteration was applied on 4 graded holographic sub-subsystems, which were decomposed from water resource system in the time-space domain, to accurately identify 30 initial scenarios. Then, on the basis of RFRM theory, the risk probabilities of the initial scenarios are calculated and ranked, and 13 high risk scenarios are identified. Finally, the quantifiable 33 risk indicators that characterize the risk scenario are presented. Research results show that the risks affecting the water resources system include the composition, quantity, quality, and management of water resources, which involve many factors such as hydrology, human resources, resource allocation, and safety. Additionally, the study gives quantitative indicators for responding to high-risk scenarios to ensure that high-risk scenarios are addressed first, which is significant for the subsequent evaluation and management of water resource system risk.

Keywords

Water resource system Risk identification HHM Risk filter Ranking 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the reviewers and the editor for their valuable suggestions. In addition, the authors wish to thank the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 51679040); the Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (General Project, grant no. E2016004) for their financial support; University Nursing Program for Young Scholars with Creative Talents in Heilongjiang Province of China (No.UNPYSCT-2017022) and Postdoctoral Scientific Research Developmental Fund of Heilongjiang Province of China (No.LBH-Q17022).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

  1. Agathokleous A, Christodoulou C, Christodoulou SE (2017) Topological robustness and vulnerability assessment of water distribution networks. Water Resour Manag 31(12):4007–4021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ando KA, Hynes JT (2016) Molecular mechanism of hcl acid ionization in water: ab initio potential energy surfaces and Monte Carlo simulations. J Phys Chem B 101(49):10464–10478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arquilla J, Ronfeldt DF (2001) Networks and Netwars: the future of terror, crime and militancy. Rand CorporationGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown C, Lall U (2006) Water and economic development: the role of variability and a framework for resilience. Nat Res Forum 30(4):306–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buytaert W, Friesen J, Liebe J, Ludwig R (2012) Assessment and management of water resources in developing, semi-arid and arid regions. Water Resour Manag 26(4):841–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen HS, Liu GS, Yang YF, Xie-Feng YE, Shi Z (2010) Comprehensive evaluation of tobacco ecological suitability of Henan province based on gis. J Integr Agric 9(4):583–592Google Scholar
  7. Essen GMV, Hof PMJVD, Jansen JD (2009) Hierarchical long-term and short-term production optimization. Soc Pet Eng J 16(16):191–199Google Scholar
  8. Fei D, Zou JJ (2008) A study on methods of project risk identification. Logistics Sci-TechGoogle Scholar
  9. Feng YL, Wang HJ (2003) Study on resources value of water. J Hydraul Eng 34(8):111–116Google Scholar
  10. Ghervase L, Ioja C, Carstea EM, Dan S (2012) Human daily activities reflected by the ecological state of natural water resources. Environ Eng Manag J 11(3):567–571Google Scholar
  11. Giordano R, Passarella G, Uricchio VF, Vurro M (2005) Fuzzy cognitive maps for issue identification in a water resources conflict resolution system. Phys Chem Earth Part A/B/C 30(6–7):463–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gong MH, Song T (2010) Study of the systematic risk identification method. SIF 5:90–96Google Scholar
  13. Haddeland I, Heinke J, Biemans H et al (2014) Global water resources affected by human interventions and climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111(9):3251–3256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haimes YY (2007) Hierarchical holographic modeling. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 11(9):606–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Haimes YY (2013) Risk modeling, assessment, and management. J Food Qual 29(2):315–315Google Scholar
  16. Haimes YY, Moser DA, Stakhiv EV, Zisk GI, Zisk B (1986) Risk-based decision making in water resources VII. ASCEGoogle Scholar
  17. Han YP, Ruan BQ, Xie JC (2003) Study on risk evaluation of a water resources system. J Xi’an UNIV TECHNO 19(1):41–45Google Scholar
  18. He S, Kilgour DM, Hipel KW, Abul Bashar M (2013) A basic hierarchical graph model for conflict resolution with application to water diversion conflicts in China. INFO SOR 51(51):103–119Google Scholar
  19. Isa D, Lee LH, Kallimani VP, Rajkumar R (2008) Text document preprocessing with the bayes formula for classification using the support vector machine. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 20(9):1264–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaplan S (2015) The general theory of quantitative risk assessment. Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE CS 15:7002–7002Google Scholar
  21. Kaplan S, Garrick BJ (1981) On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 1(1):11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu T, Shao DG (2005) Discussion on risk evaluation of a water resources system. ENG J Wuhan UNIV 38(6):66–71Google Scholar
  23. Mujumdar PP, Nirmala B (2007) A bayesian stochastic optimization model for a multi-reservoir hydropower system. Water Resour Manag 21(9):1465–1485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paté-Cornell ME, Fischbeck PS (1994) Risk management for the tiles of the space shuttle. Interfaces 24(1):64–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peng B, Liu W, Guo M (2014) Impacts of climate variability and human activities on decrease in streamflow in the qinhe river, China. Theor Appl Climatol 117(1–2):293–301Google Scholar
  26. Perry JS, Herd TJ (2004) Reducing M&a risk through improved due diligence. Strateg Leadersh 32(2):12–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruan BQ, Han YP, Wang H et al (2005) Fuzzy comprehensive assessment of water shortage risk. Hydraul J 36(8):906–912Google Scholar
  28. Said A (2006) The implementation of a bayesian network for watershed management decisions. Water Resour Manag 20(4):591–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shukla AK, Katole A, Jain N, Karthikeyan C, Mehta F, Trivedi P (2011) A risk assessment approach: qualification of a hvac system in aseptic processing area using building management system. Qual Assur J 14(3–4):40–49Google Scholar
  30. Song WJ, Xiong Hongtao (2013) Risk analysis of equipment M & A overseas M & A based on M & A preparation macroeconomics (11):87–94Google Scholar
  31. Staudinger TJ, England EC, Bleckmann C (2006) Comparative analysis of water vulnerability assessment methodologies. J Infrastruct Syst 12(2):96–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Warfield JN (1978) Societal systems planning, policy and complexity. Proc IEEE 66(3):362–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang YT, Xiao H (2011) HHM-and RFRM-based mining enterprise multi-national investment risk area analysis. FIN & ACC Mon 21:55–58Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Qiuxiang Jiang
    • 1
  • Tian Wang
    • 1
  • Zilong Wang
    • 1
  • Qiang Fu
    • 1
  • Zhimei Zhou
    • 1
  • Youzhu Zhao
    • 1
  • Yujie Dong
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Water Conservancy & Civil EngineeringNortheast Agricultural UniversityHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations