Methodology for Selecting Best Management Practices Integrating Multiple Stakeholders and Criteria. Part 2: Case Study

Abstract

Abstract:The selection of stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) for mitigating the effects of urbanization on the hydrological cycle could be a complex process due to conflicting stakeholder views, and varying levels of performance of BMPs across a range of criteria (runoff reduction, erosion control, etc.). Part 1 of this article proposed a methodology based on the application of multi-criteria decision aid (MCDA) methods, which was tested here on a residential stormwater network in the Montreal area. The case study considered green roofs, rain gardens, rain barrels and pervious pavement over a range of economic, social, and water quality and quantity criteria by applying 4 MCDA methods under three different stakeholder views. The results indicated Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Réalité (ELECTRE) III to be the most appropriate method for the methodology, presenting flexibility concerning threshold values, criteria weights, and showing shared top choices across stakeholders (rain gardens, and rain gardens in combination with pervious pavement). The methodology shows potential for more formal applications and research opportunities. Future work may lie in the inclusion of multiple objective optimization, better stakeholder engagement, estimation of economic benefits, water quality modeling, long-term hydrological simulations, and estimating real BMP pollutant removal rates.

Return on Investment in Green Urban Development

“…Scenario 4 $124 million Scenario 5 $178.5 million All the beneficial effects induced by this combination of interventions were lumped together and expressed as a change of the input hydrograph, based on the assumption that the set of GUD interventions (Scenario 2) has the equivalent effect of an improved capacity of the soil to infiltrate the storm water as would be achieved if the AMC was changed from AMCIII to AMCII, or if the soil hydrologic class was changed from soil B to Soil A which has a similar effect (Figure 5.1). Such variations are consistent with what has been observed in the literature; in fact, increasing the soil permeability, the peak reduction varies from 40% (Drake, 2014;Klingner, 2014) up to 90% (De Paola et al 2013Kowalik and Walega 2015;Aceves and Fuamba 2016). In this study, the extent of GUD interventions was estimated to meet this level of reduction in the hydrograph for a 1:10 return interval flood.…”

Incorporating stakeholders’ preferences into a multi-criteria framework for planning large-scale Nature-Based Solutions

“…In many studies, MCA uses criteria scores for the final ranking or results (Young et al 2010 ; Aceves and Fuamba 2016 ; Loc et al 2017 ). However, in this study, stakeholders’ weights on the measures are included into MCA.…”

“…Martin et al ( 2007 ) carried out the first application of MCA for LID/BMP selection by applying Elimination and Choice that Translates Reality (ELECTRE) for the analysis. Young et al ( 2010 ), Aceves and Fuamba ( 2016 ) and Alves et al ( 2018b ) used stakeholder weighting for criteria such as water quality, environmental and economic benefits, but not for the measures. The stakeholders’ weighting of measures is important, since it can be used to enhance identification of the suitable measures for the specific case study.…”

Statistical Approach to the Problem of Selecting the Most Appropriate Model for Managing Stormwater in Newly Designed Multi-Family Housing Estates

“…Their application facilitates a systemic and interdisciplinary approach to a given problem and makes it possible to consider all criteria that determine the selection of a specific design solution. A number of studies on the use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in stormwater management have been conducted around the world [20,21]. These studies, however, included systems dedicated to stormwater management at the point where the runoff occurs and concerned specific locations of the system, examples of which were presented by Li et al [22] and Jia et al [23].…”