Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489 DOI 10.1007/s00254-007-0847-y
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Multi-objective, multiple participant decision support for water management in the Andarax catchment, Almeria N. Van Cauwenbergh Æ D. Pinte Æ A. Tilmant Æ I. Frances Æ A. Pulido-Bosch Æ M. Vanclooster
Received: 10 November 2006 / Accepted: 1 May 2007 / Published online: 27 June 2007 Springer-Verlag 2007
Abstract Water management in the Andarax river basin (Almeria, Spain) is a multi-objective, multi-participant, long-term decision-making problem that faces several challenges. Adequate water allocation needs informed decisions to meet increasing socio-economic demands while respecting the environmental integrity of this basin. Key players in the Andarax water sector include the municipality of Almeria, the irrigators involved in the intensive greenhouse agricultural sector, and booming second residences. A decision support system (DSS) is developed to rank different sustainable planning and management alternatives according to their socio-economic and environmental performance. The DSS is intimately linked to sustainability indicators and is designed through a public participation process. Indicators are linked to criteria reflecting stakeholders concerns in the 2005 field survey, such as fulfilling water demand, water price, technical and economical efficiency, social and environmental impacts. Indicators can be partly quantified after simulating the operation of the groundwater reservoir over a 20-year planning period and partly through a parallel expert evaluation process. To
N. Van Cauwenbergh (&) D. Pinte M. Vanclooster Agricultural Engineering Unit, Catholic University of Louvain (UCL), Place Croix du Sud 2, Bte 2, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium e-mail:
[email protected] A. Tilmant UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, P.O. Box 3015, 2601 DA Delft, The Netherlands I. Frances A. Pulido-Bosch Grupo de Investigacion de Recursos Hidricos y Geologia Ambiental, Universidad de Almeria (UAL), Edificio CITE II-B, 04120 Almeria, Spain
predict the impact of future water demand in the catchment, several development scenarios are designed to be evaluated in the DSS. The successive multi-criteria analysis of the performance indicators permits the ranking of the different management alternatives according to the multiple objectives formulated by the different sectors/participants. This allows more informed and transparent decision-making processes for the Andarax river basin, recognizing both the socio-economic and environmental dimensions of water resources management. Keywords Decision support Stakeholder involvement Sustainability indicators Water management Multi-criteria analysis
Introduction Water scarcity is one of the most important causes for societal problems in arid or semi-arid regions. It is not as much the physical scarcity, but rather the mismanagement of the water resource, that is at the basis of these water problems and the imminent water crisis (Llamas 2004). This situation also applies to the Andarax river basin in the province of Almeria, situated in the south-east of (Fig. 1), one of the most arid regions in Europe. This river basin is the test site for the EU project ALERT, which aims at achieving sustainable water use without compromising the quantity and quality of the groundwater stored in the Andarax aquifer. Special attention is given to the problems of saltwater intrusion currently experienced in the aquifer. The Andarax river basin (Fig. 1) comprises an alluvial valley of about 250 km2 and a mountainous area around 2,000 km2 consisting of four mountain ranges: Sierra Alhamilla, Sierra de Filabres, Sierra de Gador and Sierra
123
480
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
Fig. 1 Andarax river basin, its rivers and principal irrigation areas (adapted from CAP 2002)
NACIMIENTO RIVER S i e r r a
d e
F i l a b r e s
Rambla de Gergal
Ta b e r n a s D e s e r t
Rambla de Ta bernas S i e r r a A l h a m i l l a
ANDARAX RIVER S i e r r a
d e
G a d o r
Rivers
ANDARAX RIVER
Andarax catchment Irrigation Areas 2002 water origin
Groundwater and superficial Groundwater Superficial Management polygones
Nevada. The hydrological basin consists of the rivers Andarax and Nacimento and the ‘‘ramblas’’ (i.e. temporary dry riverbeds) of Tabernas and Gergal (Pulido-Bosch et al. 1992). The region is characterized by its reduced (200– 350 mm/year) and irregular precipitation which falls mainly (70%) in autumn and winter. The area has been marked by an economical boom starting in the late 1960s based on intensive agriculture. The scarcity of surface water resources has determined that water demand in Almeria can only be satisfied by abstraction of groundwater. An uncontrolled growth model in the Andarax catchment has lead to unsustainable water abstraction rates for irrigation in an area where water resources are limited, expansion of greenhouses out of traditional agricultural area into natural zones (leading to conflicts with tourism) and a general under valuation of water as an integral resource. The aquifer system of the Andarax river basin currently supplies about 40 hm3/year to the irrigators (Plan Hidrolo´gico Cuenca Sur 1999). About 85% is derived directly from the detrital aquifer whose overexploitation results in salt intrusion, posing a threat to the environmental integrity of this water resource. The recharge of this aquifer mainly takes place in the upper part of the river basin, at high altitude. This picture may change with the commissioning of the desalination plant in
123
0
2
4
8
12
16
Kilometers
the Andarax delta and the increased re-use of depurated waste water by the irrigators in the lower delta. The water management problem in the Andarax river basin is a multi-objective, multi-participant, long-term decision-making problem. Adequate allocation decisions must be made to meet increasing demands from the municipality of Almeria, irrigators and booming second residences in the upper catchment villages. The supply model should be carefully chosen so as not to compromise the qualitative integrity of the aquifer from where much of the water originates. This groundwater resource must be managed in an integrated way, balancing economic efficiency, equity considerations and socio-environmental sustainability. Economic efficiency implies that water is allocated first to the economic sector where the benefits are highest. Equity ensures that the allocation across economically disparate groups is fair, which may contradict the efficiency principle. Sustainability is a broader criterion which includes administrative feasibility, public acceptability and long-term security, i.e. the ability of the resource to meet future demands. Sustainability also applies to the ecological dimension, often conflicting with economic interests. To allow decision makers to evaluate management alternatives in an integrated way and representing the need and interests
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
of different stakeholder groups, a computer-based decision support system (DSS) is proposed to rank different sustainable planning and management alternatives according to their socio-economic and environmental performance.
481
•
Methodology and objectives The DSS will allow to evaluate the immediate and future impacts of different management strategies on the stakeholders. These impacts relate to economic, social and ecological criteria, which are defined through a public participation process. The tool is imbedded into a Participatory Integrated Planning (PIP) procedure, that allows for the necessary stakeholder involvement as widely recommended (e.g. Hofwegem and Jaspers 1999; Barreira 2003; Dinar et al. 1997; Agencia Andaluza del Agua 2005; EU 2000). The PIP procedure formalizes the implementation of a participatory planning process according to nine steps (after Castelletti and Soncini-Sessa 2004): •
•
•
•
•
Step 1—Problem analysis and scenario derivation. This first step aims at identifying the water management problem, its stakeholders and their objectives. All available information is collected to give a general knowledge of the system and scenarios for its future development. This is done using surveys of water users and managers familiar with the system. Step 2—Identification of criteria and indicators. This step is necessary to evaluate the different alternatives. Criteria are carefully chosen and constructed to reflect the multiple dimensions associated with the allocation problem in the Andarax river basin. Indicators, which will be quantified in the actual evaluation measures, are related to the criteria. Step 3—Model identification. The model will be used to determine allocation decisions taking into account the state variables describing the system as well as their dynamics. The amount of water stored in the aquifer at a certain time of the year, for example, is expected to play a major role in the allocation. The dynamics of this storage state variable is simply the water balance equation of the groundwater reservoir. Step 4—Design of the alternatives. This step aims at removing alternative decisions that are not Pareto optimal (efficient) and is assured through the constraints in the optimization model. Step 5—Estimate the effects. Each alternative must be evaluated according to several indicators defined in Step 2. When dealing with a water resource management problem whose consequences can extend well beyond the year, it is necessary to estimate the effects over a suitable planning horizon (e.g. a decade). This is
•
achieved through the use of long-term scenarios defined in step 3. Step 6—Evaluation of the alternatives—Multi-criteria analysis. Each alternative must be evaluated according to several indicators defined in Step 2 over a planning period corresponding to the length of each scenario. This step usually leads to one evaluation matrix (score card) per scenario and stakeholder, where each element represents the score of an alternative for a specific criteria. The evaluation matrices are the starting point of the analytic treatment of the decision problem. Step 7—9 Comparison and negotiation; Mitigation and compensation; and Political choice. The ranking of the alternatives is the starting point of the negotiation process between decision makers, eventual mitigation and compensation, and ultimately leading to the identification of a consensual solution.
The objective of this study is to present steps 1 through 6 of the Participatory Integrated Planning, with special attention to the water management structure and criteria and indicator for evaluation in the DSS.
Field survey Socio-economic analysis, decision making context and stakeholder network A field survey was held during spring and summer 2005 to collect all available information on the water management in the Andarax valley, including socio-economy, institutional aspects and environmental impacts on the resources. Stakeholders were identified and contacted and water management problems were identified. Socio-economic analysis Until the 1960s, the province of Almeria was suffering from a deep economic depression due to diverse historical and production reasons such as the exhaustion of mining activities and a later frustrating export experiences with table grapes and oranges, the two primary economic activities during the first part of the 20th century (Ferraro 2000; Instituto de Estudios de Cajamar 2004). In this period the province can be catalogued as a ‘‘underdeveloped area’’ (Puyol 1975). This decline was interrupted in the beginning of the 1970s, when the Almerian economy began to recuperate, population increased and economic indicators showed not only positive but even above average values (Fig. 2a, b). In this Almerian economical take-off, the intensive and highly productive agriculture (Fig. 3a) has played a primordial role. From the late 1970s onwards,
123
482
a
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
530
a
35 population
Almeria Spain
40.00
510
25
470 450
20
430
15
410 10 390
BAV employment (10³ euro)
Almeria
BAV / employment (10³ euro)
30
Spain 490
inhabitants Almeria (10³)
45.00
35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00
5
370
0.00 Total
350
b
Sales
b
25
1,90
1.8
Almeria 20
Agriculture Industry Construction
0
1.67
Spain 1.52 1.44
1,50
15
1.3
1.26
1.23
10
1.13 0.99
1,00
5
0.77
0 67 -91
91 - 95
95 - 98
67 -98
-5
Fig. 2 a Evolution of population and agricultural productivity in Almeria (1900–2000) and b variation of employment in Almeria vs Spain (1967–1998) (own elaboration after Ferraro Garcı´a 2000; Diputacio´n de Almeria 2001; Instituto de Estudios Cajamar 2004)
agriculture has become the most important economical activity in the province, not only because of global exportation, but also because of all the induced effects that it generates in the surrounding economical network of the province. This process provoked a profound transformation of its productive and social system as well, with an important repercussion on the economy of water. Due to extreme water scarcity, the percentage of irrigation using groundwater rises up to 100% in the lower Andarax valley, whereas in Andalucia as a whole it represents only 27%. In general, the productivity of irrigation using groundwater in Andalucia is three times higher than that of surface water irrigation (2.35 e/m3 against 0.7 e/ m3). Twice as much employment is generated (23.2 EAJ/ 100 ha against 12.6 EAJ/100 ha; EAJ stands for Equivalent Annual Job which is the work of one person working full-time for 1 year. While groundwater irrigation is clearly less subsidized, it consumes 20% less than using surface
123
0,50 DE
DK
BE
UK
NL
SE
FR
CA
FI
ES
Fig. 3 a Productivity of economy per sector in Almeria vs Spain (1999 data, own elaboration after Ferraro Garcı´a 2000; Diputacio´n de Almeria 2001; Instituto de Estudios Cajamar 2004) b Drinking water price (euro/m3) in different countries vs Spain (adapted from Aqualia 2005)
water (CAP 2002). This higher socio-economic yield certainly applies to Almeria as well, where for example productivities can rise up to 12 e/m3 using groundwater in greenhouse cultivation (Vives 2003). These extraordinary characteristics of water demand for the Almerian agriculture have fueled the expansion of the irrigated area in the province, magnifying in turn the restrictions which are imposed by the scarcity of the water resource (Ferraro Garcı´a 2000). The expansion of greenhouses has been concentrated in the coastal zones of the province. Around 36% of the lower Andarax valley is covered by greenhouses. This area is expected to expand northeast, posing a threat on the neighbouring protected area at the north and east-side of the Almerian airport. More recently coastal tourism and the marble industry in the Almerian province have diversified the production
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
483
system. Tourism does not play an important role in the Andarax catchment yet, although there is an ideal setting for its development. For the 2005 Mediterranean Olympic Games XXV, a new hotel area was opened in ‘‘El Toyo’’ at the southeastern bounder of the catchment, where a sevenfold of hotels and a brand new golf course will attract an increasing number of tourists in the future, possibly leading to water problems in this desertic area. In general the Almerian construction market is one of strong speculation at present and requalification of large agricultural areas into building lots are expected to strongly increase the pressure on the available water resources. At present, the weekend tourism to second residences in the higher Andarax catchment provokes some water conflicts because of peak demands. The diversification in the production system goes hand in hand with competing interests by the different sectors. A thorough analysis of the socio-economy of water and its productivity in each sector is needed. Table 1 shows an economical estimation of the hydrological imbalance in Almeria for the sectors constituting its productive base. As more than 50% of jobs in Almeria directly depend from water-sensitive economical activities, the water debate in the province has very important socio-economic impacts. As can be seen in Table 1, the bruto added value (equivalent of economic gross added value) of water related activities in the province rises up to 1.641 million euro in 1997, representing almost 37% of the Almerian bruto (gross) internal product. Nevertheless, this high productivity of water is not translated in an elevated price, that would cover the cost to make this resource available. According to Spanish law, water does not actually have a price, although making it available to the user involves certain costs which the user must pay (Vives 2003; Perez 2001). The water authorities are transferring these costs to the user in the form of an irrigation tax or charge for irrigation water and a tax for domestic water use. These taxes or water price only consider part of the actual cost of making this water available (Perez 2001). From Fig. 3b can be seen that drinking water in Spain is one of the cheapest in Europe, although it is one of the member states with less
water resources at its disposal. As for irrigation water, which in Almeria is largely coming from groundwater, the price farmers pay for water generally corresponds to the operation costs (energy, man-hours and costs for maintenance), although in some places these costs are subsidized by local governments (pers. communication). This price has gradually augmented to values around 13.8 ecents/m3 in the 1990s, with maximum values reaching 19.8 ecents/ m3. Although the water price is of high political interest, it is rather the water quality and its availability that are the major problems locally. As a matter of fact, an increment of 200% of the water price per cubic meter—equivalent to 42 ecents/m3, which is around the estimated price for desalinated water supply—would lead to an increment of only 6% of the global production costs in intensive horticulture (Ferraro Garcı´a 2000). For irrigators, this situation has meant that the water itself lacks any economic value. Although it is true that water is not just an ordinary economic good (Savenije 2002), it is important to include economic efficiency criteria for water allocation. The traditional licensing and water management model in Spain and the Andarax catchment in particular does not satisfy this criteria. Indeed, high subsidies for distribution networks interfere with the financial balance or net cost recovery. Neither opportunity cost or costs of externalities are taken into account. Nevertheless the full consideration of these costs, related to the margin of profit made by the users and resource’s production and consumption process, forms a fundamental condition for its integrated management. Decision making context In Andalucia the recent creation of the Andalusian Water Agency (January 2005) responds to a need to change the functioning of the Basin Agencies that lack the legal means for and the experience in integral management of surface, and especially groundwater, resources. The Basin Agencies in the Andalusian Autonomous region are transformed from organisms focused on the water management supply and infrastructure development to Water Agencies focused
Table 1 Bruto added value (BAV), percentage of bruto internal product (BIP) and employment generated by activities sensitive to water in Almeria for 1997 (adapted from Ferraro 2000) Activity
BAV (106 euro)
% BIP Almeria
Employment (unities) Direct
Indirect
% Employment
Direct
Indirect
Total
Total
Intensive agriculture
695
447
1.142
25.7
55.000
14.314
69.314
41.3
Other irrigation
445
–
445
1
2.524
–
2.524
1.5
Industrial activities
128
–
128
2.9
2.790
–
2.790
1.7
Tourism
237
89
326
7.3
10.855
3.512
14.367
8.6
Total
1.105
536
1.641
36.9
71.169
17.826
88.995
53.1
123
484
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
on the integrated management of the resource, paying more attention to the environmental and quality aspects (Martinez and Hernandez 2003) and respecting the full cost recovery principle as prescribed by the EU-Water Framework Directive (EU 2000). In general, three different actors and plans can be defined in the Spanish decision making for water management (Fig. 4): •
•
•
The National Hydrological Plan and the Hydrological Basin Plans, prepared by the Ministry of Environment and evaluated by the National/Andalusian Water Council; National and Andalusian Irrigation plan, provided by the Ministry/Consejeria of Agriculture and evaluated by the Basin Agencies; Autonomous plans and local actions or ordinances related to water (such as environment, land planning, urbanism, natural spaces, public works, fisheries and mountains) reported on by Basin Agencies before action is undertaken.
Historically responsibilities are dispersed over numerous institutions, national, regional (autonomous) and local governments. Until recently, the powers of each actor and the relations between them had not been clearly laid out, making administrative cooperation a difficult task (Embid 2003). The situation is expected to improve gradually in the current transformation of institutions until the
Andalusian Water Agency will fully play its coordinating role and intervenes at crucial points as evaluator/coordinator before water related actions take place.
Stakeholder network Stakeholders in the Andarax catchment can be largely divided into four groups: (1) urban water users, with a distinction made between the city of Almeria and the rest of the catchment; (2) agricultural water users represented by irrigation cooperatives, syndicates and the rural extension offices; (3) institutions such as administrations and basin agencies and (4) a group of other stakeholders that are mainly involved in externalities of the water management such as consumer organizations, ecologists and water research institutes. All stakeholders were informed of the ALERT project and invited to cooperate at the beginning of 2005. Interviews were organized, based on an inquiry which asks the stakeholder for water supply characteristics, hydraulic infrastructure, socio-economic situation, agricultural production, etc. The field survey and open interviews coped with little data availability and a sector dependent reluctancy to speak about water problems. Water managers in the Andarax catchment generally appear to function independently from each other and until now, little transboundary collaboration in planning is established.
Ministry of Environment AAA- Andalusian Consejeria of Environment
NHP proposal NWC
NBP proposal
National Hydrological plan
AAA - AWC
Legend
Hydrological Basin Plan CH AAA GPMB + GBMD
NWC National Water Council AWC Andalucian Water Council CH Confederacion Hidrografica (Basin Authorities)
AAA Agencia Andaluza del Agua (Water Agency)
AAA
Irrigation plan for Andalusia
CH consult National Irrigaton Plan
WATER IN ANDALUSIA AND ANDARAX CATCHMENT
GPMB General Planning and Management Board GBMC General Board Meditarrenean Catchment
CH consult AAA
Autonomous plans and Local actions or ordinances e.g. urbanism, public works, natural areas
Autonomous Governments and Local entitites
Ministry of Agriculture
Fig. 4 Decision making context in Almeria—organizational structure and its institutions in Spain and Andalucia
123
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
Identification of criteria and indicators Although the water level has been constantly dropping in the last decade, only one large supply problem was revealed in the present field survey. Smaller supply problems do occur sporadically in the entire catchment. While they can be rather easily relieved at present, they will become severe in the future if the current management model is maintained. The agricultural water use in the catchment varies widely and can be generally divided in two types. On one hand, irrigators use water in a highly efficient manner in lower Andarax greenhouses. On the other hand, old irrigation systems and related water spills persist in the extensive production of mainly citrus and olives in the upper catchment. A decline in technical efficiency in the higher catchment is seen, mostly due to an aging population that does not want to invest in costly drip irrigation systems nor abandon old irrigation channels. Current programs of drip irrigation installation should improve this situation in the coming years. Urban water demand is concentrated in the city of Almeria, where around 180,000 inhabitants consume 15 hm3 yearly. Serious problems with water depuration exist. Principally, these problems are related to the bad or nonmaintenance of depuration plants that were highly subsidized during construction (up to 100% subsidies, mainly EU), but have no maintenance plan or fundings. In some of the lower catchment villages untreated wastewater is dumped directly into the Andarax riverbed because of problems with the ubication (location) of a new depuration plant. One major point of discussion in the water allocation debacle and its impact on socio-economy and environment in the Andarax catchment is related to land-use planning. Newly constructed second residences, hotels and continuous rumours on speculation to obtain water for golf courses cause a highly competitive atmosphere for discussing water rights. There is also a clear need for more transparency in water transactions that are discussed in the catchment to assure they will not provoke social conflict and jeopardize the sustainable development of the catchment. The dimensions or criteria of the allocation problem of groundwater in the Andarax catchment can be generally categorized as following: unsatisfied water demand of the different sectors (related to a general decline of water availability), reduced water quality (salt intrusion), increased water productivity (competence between intensive greenhouse cropping and extensive olive and citrics cultivation), increased water price and technical and economic efficiency. In addition to these system-related dimensions, water management decisions impact the environment and the socio-economy in general. During spring and summer 2,005 interviews were organized with different water managers and other stake-
485
holders in the catchment. Stakeholders were asked to give their opinion on the series of management alternatives as proposed by the Andalusian eco-barometer (Agencia Andaluza del Agua 2005). To design the DSS, stakeholders were asked to score their preferences for a set of nine criteria and alternatives, one being the most preferred and nine the less preferred. They were also asked to complete the criteria list if necessary. Results of opinions on water management alternatives and criteria are shown in Fig. 5. A majority of stakeholders believes that best water management alternatives are to reduce water losses in both irrigation and households. The risk for not satisfying urban demand and water quality are considered to be most important. Final ranking of (increasing) water price in both alternatives and criteria could be related to the governing water culture where the economic value of water is not appreciated. In collaboration with experts in the catchment these criteria will be translated into sustainability indicators that can be quantified to evaluate different management alternatives. Scenarios Scenarios concerning external (macro-economic or climatic) and internal (water demand, productivity and price) changes are identified in the field-survey. Scenarios consider the following variables: precipitation, water price, change in agricultural production, change in water productivity (per sector), water use, recharge, etc. These variables sets are run in the mathematical optimization/ simulation model and output is translated into indicator values. The variables consider either as direct input variable or as output of the hydrological modelling of the catchment (Mike SHE). Figure 6 shows the water scheme in Almeria from which each component will evolve differently according to the various development scenarios. Major water sources and deposits are indicated. The city of Almeria and its coastal urbanizations are supplied with groundwater pumped from outside the Andarax catchment. This groundwater will be mixed with desalinated seawater once the desalination plant is operational, leading to an alleviation of pumping in the overexploited neighbouring aquifer. Middle Andarax and Nacimiento villages use locally pumped groundwater both for urban supply and irrigation. In the higher villages surface water constitutes the most important water source. Depurated wastewater is used for irrigation in the lower Andarax delta. Scenarios in the Andarax catchment will be formulated around: desalinated water (production of desalinated water for city of Almeria); increase of re-use of depurated urban wastewater (improvement of depuration plants); growing tourism in both delta and the upper catchment and related increasing peak demands; further
123
486
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
Fig. 5 Averaged 1–9 scores for water management alternatives (1 = highly preferred, 9 = highly undesirable) and criteria (1 = very important, 9 = not important at all) in the Andarax catchment (2,005 sample)
Water management alternatives
Criteria evaluation water management
Imi
Ru
SW
WQ
B
EE
Des
DE
Dlrr
RI
D
SEI
LUr
IE
WTr
Enl WP
WP 0
2
4
6
8
0
1
3
2
4
5
6
Legend alternatives: (ImI) Improve irrigation, (SW) Save water households, (B) More boreholes, (Des) Use desalinated water, (Dirr) Diminuish water for irrigation, (D) More dams, (LUr) Limit urban constructions, (WTr) Transboundary water transfers, (WP) Increase water price Legend criteria: (RU) risk not fulfilling urban demand, (WQ) water quality, (EE) extraction efficiency, (DE) distribution efficiency, (RI) risk not fulfilling, irrigation demand, (SEI) socioeconomic impact, (IE) irrigation efficiency, (EnI) environmental impact (WP) waterprice
own wells
Groundwater wells Low and high Nacimiento to
Fiñana
good quality salinated
Village
Na
cim
ien
Tabernas desert Alboloduy
Water deposits (groundwater --- desalinated water -- depurated wastewater) Andara
x
Mayor water conducts And
arax
Calderona
Upper Andarax
7 villages Andarax catchment area to Nijar
New Deposit desalinated
Anda
Deposit PIPA ALTA
rax
MIX Deposit Parschall San Cristobal
4 Vegas El Alquian
Depuration plant
BERNAL
Bernar wells (300-500m depth)
Airport
Retamar
Almeria City (+- 177.000 inh.)
Desalination plant
Hotels + golf
Fig. 6 Water scheme and related scenarios in the Andarax catchment
decline in upper catchment agriculture; irrigation efficiency improvement by complete installation of drip irrigation in the higher catchment; migration of greenhouses from Andarax to Nijar and Morocco; transboundary water transfers (import of desalinated water to desertic areas); pricing policy; etc.
123
Decision support system The structure of the decision support system The DSS tool allows integration of information sources in a general tool, computation of optimized management
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
487
Fig. 7 Modules of the decision support system
User interface Scenarios Analysis module import
Data management module
export
Optimization module Pre-
Post-
processing
processing
module
module Integrated evaluation module
alternatives under a given set of constraints and provision of indicator scores to evaluate management scenarios. The computationally demanding tasks are done by the computer (the models) while decision makers keep control over final trade-off assessments. The architecture of the DSS software is modular (Fig. 7) and consists of a data management module in which different data sources can be loaded, a pre-processing module to detect errors in the input data, an optimization module in which the optimization model is running parallel to socio-economic calculation and/or models, a post-processing module that extracts indicators from the model and scenarios, an analysis module where multi-criteria analysis (MCA) ranks different alternatives and a user-interface that allows to visualize in- and outputs to the users. Optimization model A water management optimization model has been developed to optimize allocation of water in the catchment. The model is constrained by some physical, environmental and legal considerations. Goals are to limit the sea water intrusion, keep the piezometric heads within fixed boundaries and assure that water demand is met by pumping and/ or surface water transfers. A system of penalties gives some flexibility to the constraints. Mathematically speaking, the water resources management problem is formulated to minimise the global costs of operation which include: cost of pumping; cost of recharge; cost of water transport and production; penalties for not meeting the water demand; and penalties if piezometric head goes outside the boundaries that are subjected to the previously listed constraints. The model integers the physical behaviour of the system by using a water transfer
balance between cells. Those cells are of three types: coastal cells, transition cells and polygonal cells (Fig. 8). Estimation of effects Effects of different management alternatives and scenarios are estimated by use of indicators. Indicators reflect impact of water management on socio-economic and environmental aspects. Two types of indicators are distinguished. •
•
Process-based modelled indicators: These are quantified by the optimization model and consider hydrological and efficiency constraints such as water level, intrusion length, storage in aquifer, cost of pumping, etc. Model outputs are post-processed to obtain indicator values. Scenario related indicators: These indicators are quantified in the DSS and uncertainty in the quantification is treated by fuzzy logic. Since these indicators consider wider socio-economic and environmental phenomena, it is not possible to quantify them in an absolute way. A questionnaire is planned in the catchment where different stakeholders and experts are asked to evaluate the impact of management scenarios on water productivity, water price, environmental impact, water quality, terrain organization and social cohesion.
At the end of this stage, each management alternative in a certain scenario will get scores for the indicators and can be evaluated in the next step. Since sustainability assessment (SA) deals with attributes that are difficult to define and components that may involve both quantitative and qualitative factors, indicators will have both quantitative and qualitative values. In fuzzy logic these are rescaled to
123
488
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
Fig. 8 Management model 3 dimensional cells
: Conveyance system (canals, pipes) : Pumping/recharge stations : Consumptive use (agriculture, municipal water supply) 2-5
: Polygonal cell identification
IM 1-2
P5, R5, KP 5, CR 5, CP55 D
EX
KIM 2-3
D3
INL
AND
Polygonal cell #5 gth
ax
Lm
gth L
n len
trusio
nt in Curre
Coa
Tran s
stal
ition
cell
cell
s
s
B
T2-3
SEA
Interface toe Saltwater/fresh water interface
IM : importation [m³/year] P : Pumping [m³/year] D : Demand [m³/year] KP : Maximum pumping rate [m³/year] CR : Recharge costs [ /m³]
generally comparable indices or utilities using reference values. The rescaled or normalized indicators can then be used in the evaluation step. Evaluation of different management alternatives: multi-criteria analysis The multi-dimensional nature of SA, including environmental, economic and social issues implies a multi-objective decision making. MCA offers a way to merge the multidimensional problem into properly structures decision-making framework (e.g. Srdjevic et al. 2004; Mendoza and Prabhu 2000). At the stage of aggregating the interpreted indicator information, different techniques exist to deal with the existing trade-offs between these multiple objectives (e.g. Srdjevic et al. 2004; Yurdusev and O’Connell 2005; Banae Costa 1990). In the ALERT case study both interactive weighting through public participation and entropy based weighing will be explored in the DSS. After selection of criteria for evaluating management scenarios, the decision matrix is created with columns corresponding to performance criteria and rows corresponding to alternative scenarios. Scoring of scenarios across criteria is accomplished by running the model and post-processing its output. The scenarios can then be ranked according to their global or aggregated score on all criteria or can be evaluated criteria per criteria in the negotiation process. This process is facilitated through a user-interface in the DSS.
123
n3,S3, K 3, N 3
h3,min
intr
h3 h3,max
Max
len usion
EX: exportation [m³/year] R: Recharge [m³/year] N : Natural recharge [m/year] KR : Maximum recharge rate [m³/year] CP : Pumping costs[ /m³]
T : Transmissivity [m²/year] n : Porosity [-] S : Storativity [-] K : Hydraulic conductivity [m/year] h: hydraulic head
User interface The intention of the DSS is not to provide a single optimal solution to the water problem in the Andarax catchment. Rather the DSS will help decision makers in selecting suboptimal management alternatives knowing their multiple impacts and it will facilitate a learning process for all stakeholders in the catchment (McIntosh et al. 2005). This implies that the DSS user-interface is designed to facilitate an interactive decision making process, where end users and stakeholders keep the possibility to manipulate certain parameters in the DSS. The user of the DSS must be able to: •
•
•
Load scenarios: easily select a existing scenario from the file system, modify a loaded one, etc., visualize the inputs and outputs: select one of the layer of a scenario (input or output) and have visual interaction with it, launch and configure the optimization model: have a direct access to the optimization model using buttons and configuration panels, have access to indicators about the loaded scenarios: after a successful run, have easy access to the indicators using buttons and panels.
A GIS-based interface will be developed to allow evaluation of alternatives in a spatial context. To assure an optimal end use of the DSS, which will be largely influenced by the design and possibilities of the user-interface, stakeholders will be largely involved in design process.
Environ Geol (2008) 54:479–489
Conclusions The development of a DSS in the Andarax catchment (Almeria, Spain) will allow for an informed debate and facilitate stakeholders to evaluate different water management alternatives for their multiple impacts. Based on a field survey we identified the multiple objectives of the multiple participants as well as future characteristics of the water demand. The objectives are translated into criteria and indicators that can be treated in the DSS. To evaluate long-term characteristics of water demand different development scenarios are defined. The DSS does not pretend to be problem resolving as such, but allows decision makers to organize a participative learning and discussing process, an informed debate that excludes unsustainable activities supported by a group of stakeholders that will not only endanger rights of other stakeholders but jeopardize the sustainability of water management in the catchment as such. Acknowledgements This work was undertaken in support of the EU ALERT project (contract no. GOCE-CT-2004-505329/website http://www.coastal-alert.bgs.ac.uk/public/index.html). We would like to thank the ‘‘Grupo de Investigacio´n de Recursos Hı´dricos y Geologı´a Ambiental’’ of the University of Almeria (UAL) for their collaboration, with special reference to Isaac France´s and Sara Joretto for their contribution to the field work. We are also grateful to all stakeholders in the Andarax catchment, with special reference to the Comunidad de Regantes de Cuatro Vegas and the institutions Instituto del Agua and CENTA.
References Agencia Andaluza del Agua (2005) El Agua, Naturalmente (Water, Naturally), Consejeria de Medio Ambiente, Sevilla, Spain Banae Costa C (1990) Readings in multiple criteria decision aid. Springer, Berlin Barreira A (2003) The participatory regime of water governance in the Iberian peninsula. Water Int 28:350–357 CAP (2002) Inventory and characterization of irrigation in Andalusia. Ministry of Agriculture and Fishing of Andalucia, Andalucia Castelletti A, Soncini-Sessa R (2004) PIP: a participatory and integrated planning procedure for decision making in water resource systems. In: IFAC Workshop on Modelling and Control for Participatory Planning and Managing Water Systems, Sept 28–Oct 1, Venice Dinar A, Rosegrant M, Meinzen-Dick R (1997) Water allocation mechanisms—principles and examples. Worldbank Policy Research Working Paper, 1779, 48 Diputacio´n de Almeria (2001) Estudio del Mercado Local de Empleo del Bajo, Medio y Alto Andarax y del Nacimiento (Local employment market study of Lower, Middle and High Andarax Valley and Nacimiento). Diputacio´n de Almeria, Almeria
489 Embid A (2003) Water law in Spain after 1985. Water Int 28:290–294 EU (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official J Eur Commun, L 327:72 Ferraro Garcı´a F (2000) El Sistema Productivo Almerianse y los Condicionamientos Hidrolgicos (The Almerian production system and the Hydrological Stipulations). Estudios y Monografı´as de Caja Rural de Almeria, Civitas Ediciones. S.L., Madrid Hofwegem P, Jaspers F (1999) Analytical framework for integrated water resources management, IHE Monograph 2, Delft, The Netherlands Instituto de Estudios de Cajamar (2004) El modelo economico Almeria basado en la agricultura intensiva (The Almerian economic model based on intensive agriculture). Caja Rural Intermediterranea, Cajamar, Almeria Llamas MR (2004) Cuanta agua hay en espan˜a? A que precio y de quien es? [How much water does Spain have? At which price and who owns it?], In: G. E de la Asociacion Internacional de Recursos Hidricos (ed) ‘‘Jornadas sobre El ana´lisis econo´mico en la directiva marco del agua: incidencia e implicaciones en Espan˜a’’ [Conference on the economic analysis in the Water Framework Directive: Incidence and implications in Spain] Martinez L, Hernandez N (2003) The role of groundwater in Spain’s water policy. Water Int 28:313–320 McIntosh B, Jeffrey P, Lemon M, Winder N (2005) On the design of computer-based models for integrated environmental science. Environ Manage 35:741–752 Mendoza G, Prabhu R (2000) Multiple criteria decision making approaches to assessing forest sustainability using criteria and indicators. For Ecol Manage 131:107–126 Perez A (2001) La oferta de aguas subterra´neas para abastecimientos urbanos [Groundwater supply for urban water supply], In: Hernandez-Mora N, Llamas MR (eds) La economia del agua subterranea y su gestion colectiva [Economy and conjoint management of groundwater]. Ediciones Mundi-Prensa, Madrid, pp 75–96 Plan-Hidrologico-Cuenca-Sur (1999) ‘‘Hydrological plan for Cuenca Sur’’. ORDEN de 6 de septiembre de 1999 (BOE 17/09/1999) por la que se dispone la publicacio´n de las determinaciones de contenido normativo del Plan Hidrolgico de Cuenca Sur, aprobado por Real Decreto 1664/1998 de 24 de julio, BOE 17/09/1999 Pulido-Bosch A, Sa´nchez-Martos F, Martı´nez JL, Navarrete F (1992) Groundwater problems in a semiarid area (Low Andarx River, Almerı´a, Spain). Environ Geol Water Sci 20(3):195–204 Puyol R (1975) Almeria, un a´rea deprimida del sudeste espan˜ol ‘‘Almeria, a depressed area in the southeast of Spain’’. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientficas, Madrid Savenije H (2002) Why water is not an ordinary economic good, or why the girl is special. Phys Chem Earth 27:741–744 Srdjevic B, Medeiros Y, Faria A (2004) An objective multi-criteria evaluation of water management scenarios. Water Resour Manage 18:35–54 Vives R (2003) Economic and social profitability of water use for irrigation in Andalucia. Water Int 28:326–333 Yurdusev M, O’connell P (2005) Environmentally-sensitive water resources planning. Water Resour Manage 19:375–397
123
