Water Resources Management

, Volume 31, Issue 15, pp 4759–4784 | Cite as

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the Purposes of Groundwater Control System Design

  • D. Bajić
  • D. Polomčić
  • J. Ratković


The best way for an engineer or scientist to express their knowledge, experience and opinions is day-to-day verbal communication. When a decision needs to be made about an optimal groundwater control system, the decision-making criteria need not always be numerical values. If fuzzy logic is used in multi-criteria decision-making, the criteria are described by linguistic variables that can be represented through fuzzy membership and expert judgment is used to describe such a system. Prior hydrodynamic modeling of the aquifer regime defines the management scenarios for groundwater control and provides an indication of their effectiveness. In this paper, the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is applied to deal with a trending decision problem such as the selection of the optimal groundwater management system. Linguistic variables are used to evaluate all the criteria and sub-criteria that influence the final decision and the numerical weights of each alternative are determined by mathematical calculations. The paper presents a part of the algorithm – fuzzy optimization in hydrodynamic analysis, which leads to the selection of the optimal groundwater control system. The proposed method is applied in a real case study of an open-cast mine.


Groundwater management Hydrodynamic model Multi-criteria decision-making Expert judgment Linguistic variables Fuzzy optimization Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process 



Our gratitude goes to the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia for financing projects “OI176022“, „TR33039” and „III43004“.


  1. Akter T, Simonovic SP (2005) Aggregation of fuzzy views of a large number of stakeholders for multi-objective flood management decision-making. J Environ Manag 77(2):133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ardakanian R, Zarghami M (2004) Sustainability criteria for ranking of water resources projects. First national conference on water resources management. Iranian Water Resources Association, TehranGoogle Scholar
  3. Azarnivand A, Hashemi-Madani FS, Banihabib ME (2015) Extended fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach in water and environmental management (case study: Lake Urmia Basin, Iran). Environ Earth Sci 73:13–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bajić D, Polomčić D (2014) Fuzzy optimization in hydrodynamic analysis of groundwater control systems: case study of the pumping station “Bezdan 1”, Serbia. Geol An Balk Poluostrva. doi: 10.2298/GABP1475103B
  5. Boender CGE, De Graan JG, Lootsma FA (1989) Multicriteria decision analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparisons. Fuzzy Sets Syst 29:133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17:233–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chan FTS, Kumar N (2007) Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. OMEGA Int J Manag Sci 35:417–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95:649–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen H, Wood MD, Linstead C, Maltby E (2011) Uncertainty analysis in a GIS-based multi-criteria analysis tool for river catchment management. Environ Model Softw 26(4):395–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chitsaz N, Banihabib ME (2015) Comparison of different multi criteria decisionmaking models in prioritizing flood management alternatives. Water Resour Manag 29(8):2503–2525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Choi SJ, Kim JH, Lee DR (2012) Decision of the water shortage mitigation policy using multi-criteria decision analysis. KSCE J Civ Eng 16(2):247–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deng H (1999) Multicriteria analysis with fuzzy pair-wise comparison. Int J Approx Reason 21:215–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Domenech L, March H, Sauri D (2013) Degrowth initiatives in the urban water sector - a social multi-criteria evaluation of nonconventional water alternatives in metropolitan Barcelona. J Clean Prod 38:44–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Enea M, Piazza T (2004) Project selection by constrained fuzzy AHP. Fuzzy Optim Decis Making 3:39–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaur S, Raju KS, Kumar DN, Graillot D (2015) Multiobjective fuzzy optimization for sustainable groundwater management using particle swarm optimization and analytic element method. Hydrol Process 29:4175–4187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Geng G, Wardlaw R (2013) Application of multi-criterion decision making analysis to integrated water resources management. Water Resour Manag 27:3191–3207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Golestanifar M, Ahangari K (2012) Choosing an optimal groundwater lowering technique for open pit mines. Mine Water Environ 31(3):192–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2007) A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Resour Manag 21:1553–1566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hyde KM, Maier HR, Colby CB (2004) Reliability-based approach to multicriteria decision analysis for water resources. J Water Resour Plan Manag 130(6):429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jemcov I, Milanović S, Milanović P, Dašić T (2011) Analysis of the utility and management of karst underground reservoirs: case study of the Perućac karst spring. Carbonates Evaporites 26(1):61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kim Y, Chung E (2015) Robust prioritization of climate change adaptation strategies using the VIKOR method with objective weights. J Am Water Resour Assoc 51(5):1167–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kwang HC, Lee HJ (1999) A method for ranking fuzzy numbers and its application to decision making. IEEE Transaction on Fuzzy Systems 7(6):677–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lamata MT (2004) Ranking of alternatives with ordered weighted averaging operators. Int J Intell Syst 19:473–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liou TS, Wang MJJ (1992) Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value. Fuzzy Sets Syst 50(3):247–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lootsma FA (1981) Saaty's priority theory and the nomination of a senior professor in operations research. Eur J Oper Res 4(6):380–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luo QK, Wu JF, Yang Y, Qian JZ, Wu JC (2014) Optimal design of groundwater remediation system using a probabilistic multi-objective fast harmony search algorithm under uncertainty. J Hydrol 519:3305–3315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Masoumi I, Naraghi S, Rashidi-Nejad F, Masoumi S (2014) Application of fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making to select and to rank the post-mining land-use. Environ Earth Sci 72:221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moglia M, Sharma AK, Maheepala S (2012) Multi-criteria decision assessments using subjective logic: methodology and the case of urban water strategies. J Hydrol 452-453:180–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Morankar DV, Raju KS, Kumar DN (2013) Integrated sustainable irrigation planning with multiobjective fuzzy optimization approach. Water Resour Manag 27:3981–4004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mutikanga H, Sharma S, Vairavamoorthy K (2011) Multi-criteria decision analysis: a strategic planning tool for water loss management. Water Resour Manag 25:3947–3969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Naghadehi MZ, Mikaeil R, Ataei M (2009) The application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) approach to selection of optimum underground mining method for Jajarm bauxite mine, Iran. Expert Syst Appl 36:8218–8226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Opricović S (1998) VIKOR method. In: Praščević Ž (ed) Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. University of Belgrade - Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, pp 142–175 (in serbian)Google Scholar
  33. Opricović S. (2009). A compromise solution in water resources planning. Water Resources Management doi:  10.1007/s11269-008-9340-y
  34. Polomčić D, Bajić D (2015) Application of groundwater modeling for designing a dewatering system: case study of the Buvač open cast mine, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Geologia Croatica 68(2):123–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rahman MA, Rusteberg B, Uddin MS, Lutz A, Saada MA, Sauter M (2013) An integrated study of spatial multicriteria analysis and mathematical modeling for managed aquifer recharge site suitability mapping and site ranking at northern Gaza coastal aquifer. J Environ Manag 124:25–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rezaei-Moghaddam K, Karami E (2008) A multiple criteria evaluation of sustainable agricultural development models using AHP. Environ Dev Sustain 10(4):407–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 287Google Scholar
  38. Saaty TL (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 48(1):9–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. San Cristobal Mateo JR (2012) VIKOR. In: San Cristobal RJ (eds) Multi Criteria Analysis in the Renewable Energy Industry. Springer, London, pp 49–53 doi: 10.1007/978–1–4471-2346-0_8
  40. Sanguanduan N, Nititvattananon V (2011) Strategic decision making for urban water reuse application: a case from Thailand. Desalination 268(1–3):141–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tang H, Zhang J (2007) Study on fuzzy AHP group decision-making method based on set-valued statistics. Fourth International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery 3:689–693. doi: 10.1109/FSKD.2007.541 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tolga E, Demircan M, Kahraman C (2005) Operating system selection using fuzzy replacement analysis and analytic hierarchy process. Int J Prod Econ 97:89–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tuysuz F, Kahraman C (2006) Project risk evaluation using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: an application to information technology projects. Int J Intell Syst 21:229–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Uddameri V, Hernandez EA, Estrada F (2014) A fuzzy simulation-optimization approach for optimal estimation of groundwater availability under decision maker uncertainty. Environ Earth Sci 71:2559–2572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Van Laarhoven PJM, Pedrcyz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11:229–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Leekwijck W, Kerre EE (1999) Defuzzification: criteria and classification. Fuzzy Sets Syst 108(2):159–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wang Y, Li Z, Tang Z, Zeng G (2011) A GIS-based spatial multi-criteria approach for flood risk management in the Dongting Lake region, Hunan, Central China. Water Resour Manag 25(13):3465–3484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yang Y, Wu JF, Sun XM, Wu JC, Zheng CM (2013) A niched Pareto tabu search for multi-objective optimal design of groundwater remediation systems. J Hydrol 490:56–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a liguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning. Inf Sci 8:199–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zarghami M. & Szidarovszky F. (2011) Multicriteria analysis: applications to water and environment management, 195 pp. Berlin: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhu K, Jing Y, Chang D (1999) A discussion on extent analysis method and applications of fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 116:450–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BelgradeFaculty of Mining and Geology, Department of HydrogeologyBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations