Collaborative, Risk-Informed, Triple Bottom Line, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Planning Framework for Integrated Urban Water Management
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Coll Architecture Planning & Landscape ArchitectuIssue Date
2018-12
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
MDPICitation
Cole J, Sharvelle S, Grigg N, Pivo G, Haukaas J. Collaborative, Risk-Informed, Triple Bottom Line, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Planning Framework for Integrated Urban Water Management. Water. 2018; 10(12):1722.Journal
WATERRights
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
The historical division of water management into different sectors, with financially and technologically driven decision processes, makes taking a more holistic approach to finding sustainable solutions for urban water management difficult. Here, a planning framework for Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM) that evolved during a two-year study evaluating alternative strategies for dual water supply within a local government context is described. The planning framework was developed to overcome the obstacles that surfaced over the course of the study. It provides a structured approach to strategic decision making that integrates triple bottom line (TBL), multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), uncertainty and sensitivity analyses, and participatory decision making into an exploration of water supply alternatives. TBL assured stakeholders that the decisions considered the financial, social, and environmental performance. MCDA provided visibility into the benefits and trade-offs of the alternatives by providing a quantitative method for comparing alternatives that incorporates incommensurate performance indicators and priorities of multiple stakeholders. Uncertainty and sensitivity analyses addressed concerns regarding decision risk and improved transparency into inputs driving uncertainty in the analysis. Finally, a flexible participatory process helped to circumvent socio-institutional barriers by adapting the methodology and increasing cooperation among stakeholders and multidisciplinary experts. The resulting collaborative, risk-informed, TBL-MCDA (CRTM) planning framework helps to refine the feasible set of alternatives by providing more transparency into the drivers, technologies, and stakeholders influencing the decision. The planning framework increased the number of participants that were involved in the study, increased interaction between participants, changed the structure of the decision problem, increased the number of performance indicators considered, and improved stakeholder cooperation in the decision process.Note
Open access journalISSN
2073-4441Version
Final published versionSponsors
City of Fort Collins Utilities; National Science Foundation (NSF) Sustainability Research Network (SRN) [1444758]Additional Links
http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/10/12/1722ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.3390/w10121722
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.

