Studies and reports in hydrology

44

Recent titles in this series:

5. Discharge of selected rivers of / h e world (English/French/Spanish/Kussian).
30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 41. 48. Volurrie I11 (Part IV): Mean monthly and extreme discharges (1976-1979). 1985. Aquifer contarniriu/ion andprotection. 1980. (Also published in French and Arabic.) Methods of compulalion of the water balance of large lakes and reservoirs. Volume I: Methodolog-v. 1981. Volume 11: Case studies. 1984. Application of results from representative and experimental basins. 1982. Ground water in hard rocks. 1984. Ground-water models. Volume 1: Concepts, p r o b l e m arid inelhods of analysis with exaiiiples of their application. 1982. Sedimentation problems in river basins. 1982. (Also published in French.) Methods o$ computation o$ low stream flow. 1982. Pr0ceeding.s of the Leningrad Symposium on specific aspects of hydrological computations for water projects. 1981. (Russian only.) Methods of hydrological computations for water projects. 1982. (Also published i n French.) Hydrological aspects of drought. 1985. Guidebook to studies of land subsidence due lo ground-water wifhdrawal. 1984. Guide to the hydrology of carbonate rocks. 1984. Water and energy: demand and effects. 1985. Planning and design of drainage bsymslen?surban areas. (2 volumes.) (To be published.) in The process of water resources project planning: a systems approach. 1987. Ground water problems in coastal areas. 1987. The role of water in socio-economic development. (To be published.) Communication strategies for heightening awareness of water. 1987. Casebook of methods for computing hydrological parameters for water projects. 1987.

The process o f water resources project planning: a systems approach

Project A 4.3 of the International Hydrological Programme Report prepared by the Project Team Editorial Board: Y. Y. Haimes, Chairman J. Kindler E. J. Plate

Unesco

The designations employed and the presentation o f material throughout the publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part o f Unesco concerning the legal status o f any country, territory, city or area or o f i t s authorities, or concerning the delimitation of i t s frontiers or boundaries.

Published in 1987 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75700 Paris Printed by Irnprimerie Bietlot Freres, Fleurus, Belgique ISBN 92-3- 102476-0

0 Unesco 1987 Prinied in Belgium.

Preface

Although the total amount of water o n E a r t h i s g e n e r a l l y assumed t o have remained v i r t u a l l y c o n s t a n t during recorded h i s t o r y , periods o f f l o o d a n d d r o u g h t have c h a l l e n g e d the intellect o f man t o h a v e t h e capacity t o control the water resources available to him. Currently, the r a p i d growth o f population, t o ge th e r with 'the e x t e n s i o n o f i r r i g a t e d agriculture and i n d u s t r i a l development , are s t r e s s i n g t h e q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y aspects o f t h e natural system. Because o f t h e i n c r e a s i n g p r o b l e m s , man has begun t o r e a l i z e t h a t he can no l o n g e r f o l l o w a ' u s e a n d d i s c a r d ' p h i l o s o p h y -- e i t h e r w i t h water resources or any o t h e r n a t u r a l resource. As a r e s u l t , t h e need f o r a consistent policy o f rational management o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s has become e v i d e n t . Rational water management , however, s h o u l d b e f o u n d e d upon a thorough understanding of water a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d movement. Thus , as a contribution t o the s o l u t i o n o f t h e w o r l d ' s w a t e r proSlems, UneScO, i n 1965, began t h e f i r s t w o r l d w i d e programme of studies of the -the hydrological cycle International Hydrological Decade (IHD). The r e s e a r c h programme was complemented by a m a j o r e f f o r t in the f i e l d o f hydrological education an8 training. The activities u n d e r t a k e n d u r i n g t h e Decade p r o v e d t o b e o f g r e a t i n t e r e s t and v a l u e t o Member S t a t e s . By t h e end o f t h a t p e r i o d a m a j o r i t y o f U n e s c o ' s Member States had f o r m e d IHD N a t i o n a l Committc'es t o c a r r y o u t t h e r e l e v a n t national activities and to participate in regional and international co-operation within t h e I H D programme. The k n o w l e d g e o f the World's water r e s o u r c e s as an i n d e p e n d e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l o p t i o n and

facilities for the training of h y d r o l o g i s t s had been developed. C o n s c i o u s o f t h e need t o e x p a n d upon t h e e f f o r t s i n i t i a t e d during the International Hydrological Decade , and , following the recommendations o f Member S t a t e s , UneSCO, i n 1975, l a u n c h e d a new long-term intergovernmental programme, the International H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme ( I H P ) , to f o l l o w t h e Decade. A l t h o u g h t h e IHP i s S a s i c a l l y a scientific and educational programme, Unesco has been- a w a r e from t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a need t o d i r e c t i t s a c t i v i t i e s toward the practical solutions o f the world's v e r y r e a l water resources problems. Accordingly, and i n l i n e w i t h t h e recommendations o f t h e 1977 U n i t e d Nations Water Conference , the objectives o f the International Hydrological Programme h a v e been g r a d u a l l y expanded i n o r d e r t o c o v e r not only hydrological processes considered i n i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the environment and human a c t i v i t i e s , but a l s o t h e s c i e n t i f i c aspects o f multi-purpose u t i l i z a t i o n and c o n s e r v a t i o n o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s t o meet t h e needs o f economic and social development. Thus , w h i l e maintaining IHP ' s scientific concept, t h e o b j e c t i v e s have s h i f t e d multiperceptibly towards a disciplinary approach to the assessment, p l a n n i n g , and r a t i o n a l management o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s . AS part of Unesco ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e o b j e c t i v e s Of t h e IHP, t w o p u b l i c a t i o n s e r i e s a r e issued: 'Studies and R e p o r t s i n H y d r o l o g y ' and ' T e c h n i c a l P a p e r s i n Hydrology'. I n addition t o these publications, and in order to e x p e d i t e exchange o f information, some w o r k s a r e i s s u e d i n t h e f o r m O f T e c h n i c a l Documents.

Foreword

T h i s volume summarizes the efforts of t h e W o r k i n g Group f o r Project A.4.3.1 of Unesco ' s I n t e r n a t i o n a l H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme (IHP). T h i s Working Group was with evaluating the charged experience of countries i n the a p p l i c a t i o n i n operations research techniques i n t h e implementation o f water resource development and management. I n preparation f o r t h i s study, a p l a n n i n g s u b c o m m i t t e e f o r t h e IHP Working Group - Y.Y. Ha i mes (Chairman), J. Kindler, and E. P l a t e - was f o r m e d and f i r s t met i n P a r i s d u r i n g June 9-12, 1981. Sorin Dumitrescu, D i r e c t o r of t h e D i v i s i o n of Water Sc i ences, and John Gladwell, Project Officer f o r the Secretariat, attended t h i s first meeting, p r o v i d i n g important advice and i n s i g h t t a t h e s u b c o m m i t t e e . In p a r t i c u l a r , Messrs. D u m i t r e s c u and Gladwel 1 posed the following q u e s t i o n s t o t h e subcommittee:

Furthermore, t h e subcommittee recommended t h a t t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t r e p o r t s h o u l d be based upon case h i s t o r i e s of t h e use o f systems a n a l y s i s i n water resources p r o j e c t planning. The s u b c o m m i t t e e g e n e r a t e d a statement o f g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s for the project (see the I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h i s volume). In p r e p a r a t i o n f o r a w o r k s h o p t h a t was t o be a t t e n d e d b y t h e W o r k i n g Group, t h e subcommittee prepared a l i s t o f t h i r t y questions t h a t c o n s t i t u t e d the basis f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n and documentation o f a l l case s t u d i e s . T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e can be found in t h e Append i x . The f i r s t meeting of the W o r k i n g Group t o o k p l a c e i n I s r a e l d u r i n g O c t o b e r 25-30, 1982. Members o f t h e W o r k i n g Group i n attendance were: Y.Y. Haimes (USA), J. Kindler ( P o l a n d / l IASA), E. Plate ( F e d e r a l Republ i c o f Germany) , D . Rosbjerg (Denmark), I. Dima (Romania), and D. Howel 1 (Austral ia) J. Gladwell represented t h e Unesco S e c r e t a r i a t . The W o r k i n g Group elected Mr. Ha i mes as its Chairman and i n s t r u c t e d t h e p l a n n i n g subcomi t t e e to a c t as t h e E d i t o r i a l Board. U. Shamir F o l l o w i n g t h e meeting, (Israel) j o i n e d t h e W o r k i n g Group f o r m a l l y as an o b s e r v e r .

(7)

I s there a need for the project as described, or should i t m o d i f i e d or abandoned?

(21 What would be the Working Group produce, and what would be i t s objectives?

( 3 ) Who would be the audiencels) to whom the products would be directed?

(41

What products would useful (documents, programmes, seminars, etc. /?

be most training symposia,

After an e x t e n s i ve deliberation, the subcommittee decided to modify t h e general statement of the project and summarized i t i n t h e p r o j e c t t i t l e -

The n o m i n a l g r o u p technique (NGT) a p p r o a c h was adopted by t h e W o r k i n g Group f o r t h e p r e p r a t i o n o f t h e source m a t e r i a l for t h i s volume. The session began with brief presentations of the previously prepared case s t u d i e s , r e f e r r i n g t o each of the planning stages described i n the Paris r e p o r t o f the P l a n n i n g Subcommittee. The NGT t h e n p r o c e e d e d as f o l l o w s :

The Process of Water Project Planning: A Approach.

Resources Systems

1.

The o b j e c t i v e s of each c h a p t e r were d i s c u s s e d .

proposed

2.

Idea g e n e r a t i o n f o l l o w e d , with each participant suggesting items t h a t s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n t h e c h a p t e r under d i s c u s s i o n . B r i e f discussion, and a g g r e g a t i o n f o l lowed. clarification, of the ideas

3.

F i n a l l y , i n i t s meeting during 1985, i n P a r i s , t h e June 2 4 - 2 8 , Editorial Board incorporated the comments t h a t t h e W o r k i n g Group had made on the second d r a f t and draft for the completed a f i n a l Working Groups comments and approva 1

4.

V o t i n g and r a n k i n g o f t h e ideas was t h e n done i n o r d e r t o r e d u c e t h e number t o a workable group f o r the next step. No i d e a s were d i s c u s s e d , however. The concept a t t h i s s t a g e was o n l y t o s e l e c t t h e most important ideas f o r l a t e r development. Each p a r t i c i p a n t t h e n w r o t e h i s the thoughts about each o f selected ideas. The comments w e r e g r o u p e d b y i d e a so t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had t h e b e n e f i t o f a l l p r e v i o u s comments, and c o u l d comment on t h e s e as w e l l . The comments o n each typed. idea were

5-

Only case s t u d i e s t h a t were s u b m i t t e d t o t h e E d i t o r i a l Board in the format suggested by the q u e s t i o n n a i r e h a v e been i n c l u d e d in o f t h i s volume ( w i t h t h e Appendix t h e e x c e p t i o n o f Case S t u d y 1 0 ) . In order not t o inadvertently a l t e r the message i n t e n d e d b y t h e a u t h o r s o f t h e case s t u d i e s , no e d i t o r i a l work has been done o n them. Therefore, t h e r e s p e c t i v e a u t h o r s o f t h e case s t u d i e s , and n o t t h e W o r k i n g Group or i t s E d i t o r i a l Board, t a k e c r e d i t and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e A p p e n d i x . The W o r k i n g Group e x p r e s s e s i t s gratitude for the outstanding i t received i n Israel hospitality its meeting and its during appreciation f o r the contributions of t h e f o l l o w i n g colleagues from I s r a e l who p a r t i c i p a t e d in the K o t t , M. Works hop: f.Argaman, Y . Rebhun, J. S o r o k a , U. Shamir, Y . Bachmat, M. Ben Z v i , Y. Dreizin, D. Alkan, Y. Schwarz, Y . Segev Waldrnan. and M. The c o n t r i b u t i o n s maae b y F . Rohde ( F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany) during the Workshop are also appreciated. The E d i t o r i a l B o a r d w o u l d like to a c k n o w l e d g e t h e g u i d a n c e and support provided by the I HP Secretariat t h r o u g h John G l a d w e l l . Mr. Gladwell followed in great detail the p r o g r e s s o f t h e Working Group and o f f e r e d its Editorial Board i n v a l u a b l e s u g g e s t i o n s and improvements t h r o u g h o u t t h e d u r a t i o n of the project. W a l s o acknowledge e t h e e f f o r t s o f t h e f o l l o w i n g people: Mrs. Helene Mantovani and Miss Rouma i n of Unesco Eve 1 yne Headquarters i n P a r i s f o r t h e i r v e r y helpful s e c r e t a r i a l assistance; Mrs. V i r g i n i a Benade o f Case Western Reserve U n i v e r s i t y , Cleveland, Ohio,

6.

The W o r k i n g Group a p p l i e d t h i s technique t o the f i r s t four planning s t a g e s and t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r . The three-member Ed i t o r i a1 B o a r d u s e d t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e NGT w r i t e - u p s and t h e d o c u m e n t a t i o n of the case studies (written in accordance w i t h the questionnaire m e n t i o n e d above) as t h e b a s i s f o r the preparation o f the f i r s t d r a f t of t h i s volume. The m a t e r i a l was m a i l e d t o a l l W o r k i n g Group members f o r r e v i e w and comments. The s e v e r a l members o f the W o r k i n g Group met d u r i n g A u g u s t 1983 ( i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e IUGG/IAHS m e e t i ng) in Hamburg, Federal Republic o f Germany, to further d i s c u s s t h e p r o g r e s s on t h e f i r s t draft. I n i t s m e e t i n g d u r i n g J u l y 6-8, in Budapest, Hungary (in conjunction with the International Federation of Automatic Control the Ed i t o r i a 1 Board Congress) , g e n e r a t e d t h e second d r a f t o f t h i s vo 1 ume

1984

for her careful and c o n s t r u c t i v e editorial work; and Mrs. Mary Ann P e l o t o f Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e f o r her dedication and secretarial assistance throughout the entire project. T h i s volume i s addressed t o water resource planners and decision-makers i n both developing is and developed c o u n t r i e s . I t i n t e n d e d t o be u n d e r s t o o d w i t h o u t major prior knowledge o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s t e r m i n o l o g y , and i t c a n be u s e d a s an a i d f o r u n d e r g r a d u a t e c o u r s e s on water resources p l a n n i n g ( f o l l o w i n g an i n t r o d u c t o r y c o u r s e on systems a n a l y s i s ) . The f o l l o w i n g i s a complete l i s t o f a l l members o f t h e W o r k i n g Group:

Dr. Janusz KINDLER

I n s t i t u t e o f Environmental Eng i n e e r i ng Warsaw T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y u l . N o w o w i e j s k a 20 00-653 WARSAW Po 1 and M r s . G r a m m a t i k i PAPADOPETROU-TSINGOS lngenieur C i v i l S e r v i c e de 1 ' E c o n o m i e de 1 ' E a u M i n i s t e r e des T r a v a u x P u b l i c s C h a r i l a o u T r i k o u p i 182 ATH ENES Grece P r o f e s s o r E r i c h J. PLATE (PSC) l n s t i t u t Wasserbau I l l an d e r U n i v e r s i t a t Karlsruhe K a i s e r s t r a s s e 12 75 KARLSRUHE 1 F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany Dan ROSBJERG Associate Professor T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y o f Denmark O K - 2 8 0 0 LYNGBY Denmar k

D r . Sc. A l f r e d BECKER l n s t i t u t fur Wasserwirtschaft DDR-1190 B E R L I N S c h n e l l e r s t r . 140 German D e m o c r a t i c R e p u b l i c

Dr.

M r . Ion DlMA l n s t i t u t pour l a G e s t i o n des R e s s o u r c e s e n Eau (I.C.P.G.A.) S p l . l n d e p e n d e i 294 BUCAREST, Romania

P r o f . Yacov Y; HAIMES, Chairman Systems E n g i n e e r i n g D e p a r t m e n t Case I n s t i t u t e o f T e c h n o l o g y Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e U n i v e r s i t y CLEVELAND, O h i o 44106, USA

Observer: P r o f e s s o r U r i SHAMIR Department o f C i v i l E n g i n e e r i n g Technion I s r a e l I n s t i t u t e o f Technology T e c h n i o n C i t y , H A I F A 3 2 000 Israel

D r . D.T. HOWELL Assistant Professor U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u t h Wales New S o u t h Wales A u s t r a l ia

Contents

Introduction
1.

The Systems Approach in Water Resources Project Planning

1.1 1.2

.........................................

1.3 1.4 1.5

1.6 1.7

C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p r o j e c t and p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g Water r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m s and m o d e l s Levels of decision-making Stages i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g The p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s Advantages and ( c u r r e n t ) d i s a d v a n t a g e s o f t h e s y s t e m s a p p r o a c h t o water resources References

................................. .......................................... ................................. ............................................... ................................................. .........................................................

.....

5 5 6

9 1 1 13
14 18

2. Plan Initiation and Preliminary Planning

2.1 2.2

...............................................................................

23

2.3
2.4 2.5

2.6
2.7 2.8

2.9
3.

Problem f o r m u l a t i o n Dependency o f p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n o n " n o n - w a t e r " s e c t o r s Statement o f p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s Project constraints A g e n c i e s and p e r s o n n e l i n v o l v e d S e l e c t i o n and u t i l i z a t i o n o f e x p e r t s Public p a r t i c i p a t i o n P r e l i m i n a r y s e l e c t i o n o f systems a n a l y s i s t o o l s References

................................................ .............. .................................... ................................................ .................................... ............................... ............................................... .................... .........................................................

.............................................................................................

23
25

25 26
27 28 29 30 32
33
33 34

Data Collection and Processing

3.1
3.2

3.3
3.4

3.5
3.6 3.7

s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f d a t a needs D a t a adequacy Data a c q u i s i t i o n Data q u a l i t y c o n t r o l D a t a p r o c e s s i n g and s c r e e n i n g Data i n f o r m a t i o n systems References

........................................ ...................................................... ................................................... ............................................... ...................................... ........................................... .........................................................

...........................................................

35
36 37 3E 32

4. Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

41 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
48 49 51

4.1
4.2

Overview o f the e v a l u a t i o n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s stages C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of alternatives 4.3 Generation o f a l t e r n a t i v e s 4.4 Model c r e d i b i l i t y and model c a l i b r a t i o n 4.5 I n t e r a c t i o n between a n a l y s t and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r 4 . 6 C o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h o t h e r p l a n s and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n 4 . 7 P r o c e d u r e s and t e c h n i q u e s f o r s c r e e n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s 4.8 Use o f h i e r a r c h i c a l a n a l y s i s i n p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s 4.9 Use o f m u l t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s 4.10 References

.................. ..................................... ......................................... ............................ ..................... ............ ............... ......................................... ...................................... .........................................................

5 . Development of Final Study Results........................................................................................

The r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n s t a g e s 3 and 4 I n p u t t o and o u t p u t from s t a g e 4 5 . 3 S o u r c e s . q u a l i t y and c a t e g o r i e s o f s t a g e 4 d a t a needs 5 . 4 The r o l e o f m o d e l i n g . s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n 5.5 R i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y 5.6 S e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s 5.7 U n c e r t a i t i e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s 5.8 I m p a c t a n a l y s i s and p o l i c y a n a l y s i s 5.9 M o d e l ( s ) a s p a r t o f t h e s t u d y p r o d u c t 5.10 P l a n n i n g f o r o p e r a t i o n 5.11 Modes o f p r e s e n t i n g t h e p l a n t o t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s 5.12 R e f e r e n c e s

53

5.1
5.2

............................ ................................... .............. .................. ............................................... ............................................... .................. ................................ .............................. ............................................. ................ .........................................................
...................................................................................................

53
54 55

57
58 60 61

62 62 63 64 65 67 67 67
69

6 . Developing the Case Studies

6.1
6.2

6.3 6.4

The example case s t u d y I n s t r u c t i o n s used i n f o r m u l a t i n g t h e c a s e s t u d i e s The p u r p o s e and scope o f t h e q u e s t i o n s Some c o n c l u s i o n s f r o m t h e case s t u d i e s

............................................. .................. ............................. .............................

72 75 77

Appendix I : The Questionnaire Appendix II : Case Studies

1

...................................................................................................

............................................................................................................

. .

P ' l a n n i n g a System f o r F l o o d P r o t e c t i o n R e s e r v o i r s f o r t h e S u l m Catchment i n t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany, b y E.J. P l a t e

.......................

73

Development o f Water S u p p l y Schemes i n t h e E a s t e r n Neger. I s r a e l . D e s c r i p t i o n . by D Alkan

................................................

General
91

3.
4.

Long Term I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n i n g o f t h e D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y i n t h e Bresser P r o v i n c e o f S o u t h H o l l a n d (The N e t h e r l a n d s ) : IODZH. b y A.H.M. P o s t E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n L e v e l - B S t u d y . b y Y . Y . Haimes. K Sung. L.T. Crook. D G r e g o r k a

...

99

......... 113
131

5
6

The P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n k d e l a i d e Water Resources Study o f June 1978. by D.T. H o w e l l

............................................

Post E v a l u a t i o n of t h e P l a n n i n g Process i n t h e V i s t u l a River Basin. P o l a n d . b y 2 Kaczmarek and J K i n d l e r

..................................

139

7.

Development o f a Water Resources Management Model f o r t h e Susaa Catchment i n Denmark. b y D . R o s b j e r g Management o f I s r a e l ' s Water

. 9.
8
10

.................................... R e s o u r c e s . by U . Shamir ....................

. .

143 1 %

P r o m o t i o n o f M u l t i p u r p o s e Water Management F a c i l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare B a s i n . b y P S t e g a r o i u . I D i m a . R A m a f t i e s e i and V V i s a n

........ 1 6 3

A p p l i c a t i o n o f S i m u l a t i o n T e c h n i q u e s i n Water Resources P l a n n i n g i n t h e German D e m o c r a t i c R e p u b l i c . b y A B e c k e r and D K o z e r s k i

............... 1 7 s

Introduction

The i n t e r n a t i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e o n water resources planning includes many applications of systems ana!ysis and o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h t e c h n i ques to water resources projects. E x c e l l e n t textbooks e x i s t on v a r i o u s a s p e c t s (for example, Wiener 1972; Haimes 1977; Goodman 1984; Cohon 1978; Loucks e t a l . 19811, and numerous p r o b l e m methods are a v a i l a b l e for f i n d i n g optimum solutions or good compromises (Goicocchea e t a l . 1982; Haimes e t al. 1975). The need to find optimum solutions i n water resources is c o m p e l l i n g indeed. The more we l o o k i n t o t h e development prospects of any o f the countries of the world, t h e more we p e r c e i v e t h a t f u t u r e growth i s a l m o s t everywhere s e v e r e l y c o n s t r a i n e d by t h e shortage o f water o f s u f f i c i e n t q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y , a s h o r t a g e which o n l y i n r a r e cases can be overcome b y m a k i n g new resources a v a i l a b l e . I n g e n e r a l , we must make better use of the a v a i l a b l e w a t e r , and we must employ b e t t e r methods f o r conservation, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and p u r i f i c a t i o n . The s e v e r i t y of t h e s e p r o b l e m s has been recognized, and international and n a t i o n a l programmes have h e l p e d t o disseminate i n f o r m a t i o n on w a t e r p r o b l e m s and t o d r a w t h e a t t e n t i o n o f p u b l i c and p o l i t i c a l bodies such as t h e Mar d e l P l a t a Water C o n f e r e n c e o f t h e UN i n 1977 and t h e International D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y and S a n i t a t i o n Decade Programme - t o such p r o b l e m s . S c i e n t i f i c support programmes proliferate, such as SCOPE, HOMS, and the Unesco I n t e r n a t i ona 1 Hydrological of these, Programme. In all optimization or systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s a r e w i d e l y recommended. I t therefore i s strange t o f i n d in comparison with the

e x t e n s i v e l i t e r a t u r e on t h e methods o f systems a n a l y s i s , t h e r e h a v e b e e n of the successful few reports I t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f such methods. seems t h a t a gap e x i s t s b e t w e e n t h e s t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t o f systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s and t h e i r c u r r e n t u s e in A r e c e n t r e p o r t by Loucks practice. et al. (1984) has i n d i c a t e d t h a t o n l y a small p a r t of t h e s t u d i e s o f water resources systems w h i c h were r e p o r t e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e were a c t u a l l y used b y t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s f o r whom t h e y w e r e i n t e n d e d . Since the published l i t e r a t u r e i s only a vague i n d i c a t o r o f what i s g o i n g on a i n t h e p r a c t i c i n G r e a l world, within the working 9 r OUP I n t e r n a t i o n a l H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme was e s t a b l i s h e d and i t was a s s i g n e d the task o f f i n d i n g o u t w h a t has been t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e member countries t h a t u s e systems a n a l y s i s techniques. T h i s group, c a l l e d t h e Working Group on IHP Problem A.4.3.1, was i n i t i a t e d b y a m e e t i n g o f t h e p l a n n i n g subcommittee. The W o r k i n g G r o u p ' s p l a n n i n g subcommittee, a t i t s f i r s t m e e t i n g in Paris i n 1981, reviewed the situation and arrived at the conclusion that i t would n o t be s u f f i c i e n t t o v i e w t h e success o r failure of systems a n a l y s i s i n t h e o v e r a l l c o n t e x t o f water resources management and p l a n n i n g : t h e group s h o u l d a l s o i d e n t i f y t h e l e v e l s and stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s and p e r c e i v e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of methods as s p e c i f i c t o them. Only i n t h i s way c o u l d t h e p r e s e n t p l a c e of systems z n a l y s i s i n the planning process be' recognized and a d i f f e r e n t i a t e d statement concerning t h e acceptance o f systems a n a l y s i s techniques be developed. In particular, the p l ann i ng subcommittee adopted t h e n o t i o n t h a t the water resources planning process addresses, and m u s t b e r e s p o n s i v e

that,

-2

Elements o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y c h a r a c t e r i z e most, i f n o t a l l , water resources systems. The planning process hierarchical i n nature, as the decision-making process.

t o , many a s p e c t s o f w a t e r resources planning (e.g., hydrological, scientific, technological, i n s t i t u t i o n a l , and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g ) . Having accepted t h i s idea, the group agreed t h a t i t s e f f o r t s h o u l d o f f e r a framework t h a t would enable the quantitative aspects of water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g t o be i n t e g r a t e d with the more subjective/value j u d g m e n t and q u a l i t a t i v e a s p e c t s o f - a the decision-making process process influenced by political-institutional trade-offs and drifting with dynam i c The planning o b j e c t ives subcommittee a l s o aGreed o n t h e following objectives of this projects:

is
is

The components of problem d e f i n i t i o n and f o r m u l a t i o n , d a t a collection, and model i ng constitute a more dominant effort i n the p l a n n i n g process t h a n t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n p e r se. The p r o c e s s o f w a t e r resources planning involves experts from many d i f f e r e n t d i s c i p l i n e s , s u c h as h y d r o 1 ogy, engineering, economics, p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l B a s e d , on t h e s e concepts,the planning subcommittee designed a general scheme o f the planning process,identifying six stages ranging from p r o j e c t i n i t i a t i o n t o management o f t h e c o m p l e t e p r o j e c t . They devised a set of thirty q u e s t i o n s o n t h e s e s t a g e s , and t h i s questionnaire was sent to a l l members o f t h e W o r k i n g Group w i t h a r e q u e s t t o p r e s e n t case s t u d i e s from their c o u n t r i e s by answering t h e questionnaire. The r e s u l t s o f t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s a r e found i n t h i s book. I t s purpose i s t o d i s c u s s and explain the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s w i t h emphasis o n t h e u s e o f s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s , and t o i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p r o c e s s b y means o f d i f f e r e n t examples t a k e n f r o m t h e experiences of water resources e n g i n e e r s end s c i e n t i s t s f r o m many different countries. I n g e n e r a l , we p e r c e i v e t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as a sequence of decisions a t many different levels and by many d i f f e r e n t groups o f experts and c o n c e r n e d p e r s o n s whose o b j e c t i v e i s t o provide a s o l u t i o n or solutions t o l a r g e - s c a l e problems, i n our case i n v o l v i n g t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f water resources. T h i s p r o c e s s can b e but subdivided into different i n t e r r e l a t e d stages, each w i t h i t s own c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s u b p r o b l e m s , b y means o f .a model o f t h e p l a n n i n g process, which provides a general framework for the case studies, T h i s general framework i s describe,d

(1) P r o v i d e a s y s t e m s f r a m e w o r k for t h e p l a n n i n g process i n water resources development.

(2) C a s t o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h / s y s t e m s engineering i n t o the context of a real-world water resources p l a n n i n g environment.

(3) P r o v i d e

instructional material t h a t can b e u s e d t o t e a c h w a t e r resources planning.

To i l l u s t r a t e t h e b r e a d t h o f the water resources planning process, the following representative premises were i d e n t i f i e d t o s e r v e as g u i d a n c e to W o r k i n g Group.
Water r e s o u r c e s systems most o f t e n have m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e s , u s e , and f u n c t i o n s . The consideration of the scientific and technological aspects of water resources is a necessary p r o b 1 ems condition for a successful planning process, but not sufficient: institutional and other considerations are essential. M u l t i p l e decision-makers, who represent v a r i ous constituencies, needs, and aspirations, are commonly involved i n the planning process and t h u s should be properly accounted f o r i n t h e process.

-3-

i n the f i r s t f i v e chapters; the the sixth chapter p r o v i des introduction t o t h e case s t u d i e s , w h i c h a r e appended t o t h e b o o k . of the I n our d e s c r i p t i o n planning process, we use t e r m i n o l o g i e s and terms t h a t a r e understandable to e n g i n e e r s and p l a n n e r s , and t h e d i s c u s s i o n is in general terms, leaving analytical d e t a i l s t o t h e case s t u d i e s o r t o the l i t e r a t u r e t o which r e f e r e n c e i s I t i s not the made as a p p r o p r i a t e . purpose t o p o i n t out a n a l y t i c a l s o l u t i o n s ; i n d e e d , t h e case s t u d i e s i l l u s t r a t e why a n a l y t i c a l s o l u t i o n s may o f t e n n o t be needed. Naturally we recommend t h a t systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s and o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h be u s e d whenever a p p l i c a b l e , b u t we r e a l i z e t h a t an optimum r e a l - w o r l d so: u t i o n does not necessar I 1y c o n s i s t of a s o l u t i o n w h i c h is, m a t h e m a t i c a l l y speaking, the true optimum. The r e a l - w o r l d o p t i m u m i s u s u a l l y t h e compromise s o l u t i o n on which a l l p a r t i e s involved i n the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s can a g r e e , and we in t h is book the emphas i z e a n a l y t i c a l aspects of t h i s process.

1.

Document and evaluate the applicability of systems analysis used i n the various stages o f the water resources p l a n n i n g process. C o n t r i b u t e t o t h e development of a common a p p r o a c h f o r project p l a n n i n g i n water resources. Articulate problems t h a t may systems defer a p p l i c a t i o n of a n a l y s i s and p l a n a c c e p t a n c e ; and, p e r h a p s , p r o v i d e t h e means o f o v e r c o m i n g them. S e r v e as a t e x t b o o k for Unesco courses on water resources planning.

2.

3.

4.

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e t h a t was p r e p a r e d f o r e a c h o f t h e p l a n n i n g s t a g e s and t h a t was u s e d as a g u i d e l i n e f o r t h e case studies is presented as Appendix 1 References Cohon, J . L . 1978. Multiobjective Programming and Planning. Academic P r e s s , New Y o r k . Goicoechea, A . , D. Hansen, and L . 1982. I n t r o d u c t i o n Duckstein. t o Multiobjective Analysis w i t h Engineering and Bus i n e s s Applicatiorls. W i l e y , New Y o r k .

The p l a n n i n g ' p r o c e s s as h e r e d e s c r i b e d n o t o n l y encompasses t h e stages t h a t lead t o the d e s i g n o f structures i n a new p r o j e c t ; i t c a n a l s o b e a p p l i e d t o e x i s t i n g systems on w h i c h new demands a r e made, o r t o p r o j e c t s w h i c h have l i t t l e t o d o with structures, such as g e n e r a l water p l a n s o r r e g i o n a l development plans. The p l ann i ng process i n c l u d e s many a s p e c t s o f o p e r a t i o n and maintenance, a1 t h o u g h t h e s e stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g process a r e n o t d e t a i l e d here. The book i s n o t c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and management s t a g e s that are p a r t of any p r o j e c t i n v o l v i n g s t r u c t u r e s and equipment i n i t s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . I t i s hoped t h a t t h i s book w i l l convey t o t h e r e a d e r s a sense t h a t t h e systems a p p r o a c h can p r o v i d e one w i t h a method b y means o f w h i c h water resources planning can be s t r u c t u r e d and made amenable to anal ys i s. T h i s book o b j ec t i v e s : has the following

1984. P r i n c i p l e s o f Goodman, A . S . Water Resources Planning, P r e n t i ceHal 1 , E n g 1 ewood C l i f f s , NJ.

Y.Y. 1977. Hierarchical Haimes, Analyses o f Water Resources Systems : Model i ng and Optimization of Large-scale Systems. M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

W.A. Hall, and H. Haimes, Y.Y., Freedman. 1975. M u l t i o b j e c t i v e O p t i m i z a t i o n i n Water R e s o u r c e s Systems: The S u r r o g a t e W o r t h TradeO f f Method. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Loucks, D.?., J.R. Stedinger, and D.A. Haith. 1981. Water R e s o u r c e s Systems P l a n n i n g and P r e n t ice Hal 1 , Ana 1 y i s . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ.

-4-

Loucks,D.P., J.R. S t e d i n g e r , and U . 1984. Research in Shamir. Water Resources and Environmental P o l i c y Modelling: Some historical perspectives, current issues, and future directions. Natural Resources 8, h 0 . 3 . Forum. Vol.

Wiener, A . 1972. The R o l e o f Water i n Deve 1 opment McGraw-Hill, New Y o r k .

1. The systems approach in water resources project planning

The p r o c e s s o f bringing a project into existence can be t h o u g h t o f as c o n s i s t i n g o f three phases :

Phase 1.

Planning
P l a n i n i t i a t i o n and preliminary planning D a t a c o l l e c t i o n and processing Formulation o f and s c r e e n i n g and p r o j e c t alternatives Development o f final project specification Project design

Stage 1 . Stage 2 . Stage

3.

The planning process is described in this chapter as consisting of stages r e l a t e d to d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f decision-making. W begin with e i n t r o d u c t o r y remarks on t h e n a t u r e o f water resources s y s t e m s and t h e i r p l a n n i n g and t h e n p r e s e n t a g e n e r a l framework f o r t h e p l a n n i n g process. The c o n c e p t of t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s i s summarized which p r o v i d e s the i n Figure 1.1, s t r u c t u r e for the remaining chapters o f t h e book.

Stage 4. Stage

5.

1.1 Characteristics of water resources project and project planning

Phase 2. Phase 3.

Implementation Project Operation

The o v e r a l 1 p r o c e s s i s shown The schematically i n Figure 1.1. scope o f t h i s book is limited to Phase 1 , f o c u s s i n g on t h e p l a n n i n g o f r e g i o n a l water p r o j e c t s t h a t a r e initiated in response to the s p e c i f i c economic and s o c i a l needs of a region or nation. These p r o j e c t s may b e o f a s t r u c t u r a l o r n o n s t r u c t u r a l c h a r a c t e r : t h e y may b e of a singleor multiple-purpose n a t u r e ; however, t h e i r a n a l y s i s must always be multiobjective in character. Th i s I S because evaluation of project alternatives must a l w a y s be c a r r i e d o u t w i t h i n t h e broad spectrum o f objectives, and v a r i o u s p r o j e c t i m p a c t s must b e the taken i n t o account. Phase 1 , planning process, consists of a number o f stages. Each o f these s t a g e s has a d e f i n i t e f u n c t i o n and i s s e p a r a t e d more o r l e s s d i s t i n c t l y i n time from o t h e r stages. Although o n l y t h e p l a n n i n g phase and i t s f i v e stages a r e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s book, t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s needs t o t a k e c o g n i z a n c e o f Phase 2 and Phase 3 and use their ingredients for p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g purposes. These l a s t two phases, o f course, depend on t h e f i r s t , and t h e y can a l s o l e a d to future projects.

A water resources p r o j e c t i s a set o f s t r u c t u r a l or nonstructural activities for the purpose of developing or improving e x i s t i n g water resources f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f human u s e . The u l t i m a t e g o a l o f water resources planning and management i s t o s e r v e t h e p u b l i c w e l l - b e i n g - t o ensure t h a t water will be a v a i l a b l e , in sufficient q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y , a t t h e r i g h t l o c a t i o n , and a t t h e r i g h t t i m e , and t o p r o t e c t human a c t i v i t i e s f r o m t h e harmful e f f e c t s o f water; all this must b e done w i t h i n a c c e p t e d l e v e l s o f assurance.
Water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g is a l o g i c a l course o f a c t i o n s leading t o the s e l e c t i o n o f the best acceptable p r o j e c t i n r e s p o n s e t o an i d e n t i f i e d need. Because o f t h e w i d e r e g i o n a l distribution of surface water and groundwater resources, water resources planning i s always v e r y broad i n scope. Such p l a n n i ng r e q u i r e s t h a t many d i f f e r e n t u s e s o f water b e c o n s i d e r e d and e v a l u a t e d , leading t o the articulation of trade-offs among c o n f l i c t i n g and competing o b j e c t i v e s . I t requires that d e c i s i o n s b e made o n many different levels, ranging from n a t i o n a l o r even i n t e r n a t i o n a l w a t e r plans t o regional or local projects and involving experts and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s who h a v e d i f f e r e n t

-6

or logical functions. I n general, systems a n a l y s i s i s t h e s t u d y o f a l l t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s o f t h e components. Very often systems a n a l y s i s is concerned with finding that combination of components which g e n e r a t e s an optimum, i . e . , a s y s t e m which c o n s i s t s o f the b e s t p o s s i b l e combination of elements for satisfying the desired objective. This statement should not be i n t e r p r e t e d as r e q u i r i n g t h a t the u s e o f s y s t e m models m u s t l e a d t o an optimum s o l u t i o n i n t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l sense, in which an objective function i s m i n i m i z e d o r maximized. Unfortunately, i n water resources s y s t e m s , m o r e emphasis and e f f o r t h a v e been f o c u s s e d o n o p t i m i z a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s t h a n o n more r e a l i s t i c m a t h e m a t i c a l models. T h e r e a r e two r e a s o n s f o r the overemphasis on optimization techniques: a) Abundant o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques are available i n f i e l d s other than water resources e n g i n e e r i n g , such as o p e r a t i o n s research, systems e n g i n e e r i n g , and c o n t r o l t h e o r y . b) The mastery of optimization techniques requires far less experience, effort, and p r o f e s s i o n a l m a t u r i t y than t h e of systems m o d e l i n g . mastery C o n s e q u e n t l y , i t has been q u i t e common to apply optimization techniques t o poorly constructed models, which o f t e n represent a d i s t o r t i o n o f the real physical s y s t e m and a r e t h u s m i s l e a d i n g i f n o t erroneous. There i s a p r e s e n t t r e n d toward a c h i e v i n g a b e t t e r b a l a n c e between systems m o d e l i n g and i t s a s s o c i a t e d o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques. I f s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s methods a r e t o b e employed i n t h e s t u d y o f a water r e s o u r c e s system, t h e l a t t e r m u s t s a t i s f y a number o f c o n d i t i o n s . F i r s t o f a l l , i t must be p o s s i b l e t o i d e n t i f y the combination o f objects which form the s y s t e m and t o separate them logically and f u n c t i o n a l l y from a l l o t h e r elements of the planning region. Thus, a bridge i s t o be seen as an o b j e c t
which
irnnericx
(or t i n e s

b a c k g r o u n d s and who a r e o f t e n n o t water-cognizant: politicians, l a w y e r s , and s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s . The o b j e c t i v e s t h a t such a v a r i e d g r o u p consider important f o r a p a r t i c u l a r water p r o j e c t many differ very widely. Water resources planning therefore r e q u i r e s a p l a n n i n g team that i s well c o o r d i n a t e d and in agreement o n t h e o b j e c t i v e s and scope of the project, who c a n present a f i n a l project plan that r e p r e s e n t s t h e agreement o f a l l team members. T h i s i s n o t an easy t a s k , because w a t e r r e s o u r c e s a r e s u b j e c t t o natural variations, and f u t u r e changes i n demography a n d economy This i s a are d i f f i c u l t to predict. major way that elements of u n c e r t a i n t y e n t e r the process: these e l e m e n t s a r e e s s e n t i a l , a n d i n many cases dominant, f e a t u r e s o f water p r o j ec t s Other compl i c a t i o n s s p e c i f i c t o water resources p r o j e c t s a r e due t o t h e f a c t t h a t many w a t e r are resources dec i s i o n s irreversible. For i n s t a n c e , a dam t h a t has b e e n b u i l t in a river valley exists p r a c t i c a l l y forever, r e g a r d l e s s o f whether there is a need f o r i t o r n o t ; i t w i l l n e v e r b e possible t o restore the s i t e t o i t s o r i g i n a l c o n d i t i o n , even i f s o c i e t y i s w i l l i n g t o provide funds f o r the r e m o v a l o f a dam t h a t i s n o l o n g e r needed.

Because o f the complexity o f the issues involved in water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and because o f t h e l a r g e consequences t h a t r e s u l t f r o m d e c i s i o n s on w a t e r p r o j e c t s , p l a n n i n g methods m u s t b e employed which c a n h a n d l e such p r o b l e m s . T h i s i s how t h e s y s t e m s a p p r o a c h enters the analysis of water projects.

1.2 Water resources systems and models

physical water resources systems i s a c o l l e c t i o n of various e l e m e n t s - f o r example, reservoirs, pipelines, and o t h e r structures which i n t e r a c t i n a l o g i c a l manner and a r e d e s i g n e d i n r e s p o n s e t o v a r ious social needs. Water r e s o u r c e s systems a n a l y s i s i s an a p p r o a c h b y w h i c h t h e components o f a s y s t e m and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s a r e d e s c r i b e d b y means o f m a t h e m a t i c a l

not

irnnPdP)

-7-

river flows i f i t does, i t becomes part of t h e s y s t e m o f conveyance i t leads; if channels over which n o t , i t can be l e f t o u t . Second, we must be able t o identify the e l e m e n t s and be a b l e t o d e s c r i b e their functions, i.e., t o develop a p r o c e s s model for each component, and we m u s t b e a b l e t o q u a n t i f y their relations with the other e l e m e n t s o f t h e system. T h i r d , one has t o b e a b l e t o combine a n d / o r c o o r d i n a t e component models and t o d e f i n e o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s i n such a way t h a t the objectives to be o p t i m i z e d can be expressed i n terms o f t h e systems v a r i a b l e s . Systems a n a l y s i s may b e u s e d t o f i n d a "best acceptable" solution. But t h i s i s n o t i t s o n l y purpose. O f ten it is applied for " s t r u c t u r i ng" a water resources project. By s t r u c t u r i n g i t i s meant t h a t t h e systems e l e m e n t s a r e drawn i n t o a b l o c k d i a g r a m and c o n n e c t e d b y means o f logical statements. When a s y s t e m i s r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e f o r m o f such a diagram, i t i s e a s i e r t o "see" how d i f f e r e n t components must i n t e r a c t f o r t h e system t o p e r f o r m p r o p e r l y , o r how t h e system' i n t e r a c t s w i t h i t s environment. By i s o l a t i n g subsystems o f the water r e s o u r c e s system, t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e can be tested and analyzed separately. I n t h i s manner, the systems a p p r o a c h g i v e s t r a n s p a r e n c y to the planning process and s i m p l i f i e s the discussion on a l l levels of the decision-making process; and i t easily permits a d d i t i o n or d e l e t i o n o f d i f f e r e n t components o r i n t e r a c t i o n s .

because o f t h e need t o i n c o r p o r a t e stochastic v a r i a b i l i t y into the s y s tern ana 1 y s i s . Within the framework o f c o m p u t e r - a i d e d systems analysis, the planner has to recognize the existence o f (i) ( i i) multiple constituencies m u l t i p l e decision-makers many levels of hierarchical structure at the

that are ( i i i ) multiple objectives noncommensurable and a r e o f t e n i n c o n f l i c t and/or c o m p e t i t i o n (iv) m u l t i p l e purposes and/or uses o f t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s system elements of uncertainties risk and

(v)

These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i c t a t e t h a t t h e p l a n n i n g team b e composed of experts who represent the multidisciplinary/interdisciplinary nature of the issues being considered. However, systems a n a l y s i s is n o t an a p p r o a c h t h a t can be used automatically and w i t h o u t t h i n k i n g . Usually, the greatest e f f o r t o f the a n a l y s t i s t o reduce t h e system t o a manageable representation without destroying i t s essential features and r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The a n a l y s t may overlook important relationships b e c a u s e he may l a c k a c c e s s t o a l l n e c e s s a r y d a t a , and u s u a l l y t i m e is n o t s u f f i c i e n t i n an a c t u a l p l a n n i n g environment t o develop t h e ideal it to its fullest model and t e s t extent or to subject i t t o the s c r u t i n y o f several experts. T y p i c a l models i n c l u d e process models, i.e., m a t h e m a t i c a l models which describe the physical and o t h e r processes symbolized by system elements: input-output models o f w a t e r q u a n t i t y and w a t e r q u a l i t y parameters f o r rivers, reservoirs, groundwater, and distribution systems, such as p i p e - l i n e s and Process m o d e l s c a n be cana 1 s . considered as r e p r e s e n t i n g p u r e l y s t a t i c r e l a t i o n s , such a s t h e r i v e r stage-discharge relationship, or

is The systems approach especially u s e f u l when a p r o j e c t becomes so l a r g e t h a t i t c a n n o t b e c o n s i d e r e d as a u n i t , n e c e s s i t a t i n g i t s decomposition (disaggregation). I n contemporary p r o j e c t s , systems a r e so l a r g e o r complex t h a t t h e y can o n l y be a n a l y z e d w i t h t h e a i d of computers. These a r e needed because of the complexity of the r e l a t i o n s h i p s - f o r example, dynamic systems that have non1 i near i n t e r a c t i o n s - o r because o f t h e m u l t i t u d e of purposes o r p o s s i b l e c o m b i n a t i o n s o f systems e l e m e n t s , o r

-8-

t h e y c a n r e p r e s e n t dynamic p r o c e s s e s such as the outflow -from a reservoir, or the motion o f a f l o o d wave i n t h e r i v e r c h a n n e l . These models i n their usual form a r e o f the deterministic kind, but within t h e framework o f systems a n a l y s i s i t might be necessary t o consider stochastic or non-deterministic aspects, s u c h a s t h o s e due t o t h e time v a r i a b i l i t y of the runoff p r o c e s s or t h e random n a t u r e o f t h e runoff coefficients. The p r o c e s s are often part of mode 1 s c o n v e n t i o n a l d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e s and therefore are f a m i l i a r t o planning But s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s , i n engineers. addition, employs o t h e r types o f models, such as d e c i s i o n models. O p t i m i z a t i o n m o d e l s , such as linear p r o g r a m m i n g , dynamic programming, o r the surrogate worth trade-off method, are important tools and procedures for solving decision problems by o p t i m i z a t i o n . Other decision models may not use optimization techniques, such as many s i m u l a t i o n m o d e l s . The d r i v i n g force in the o p t i m i z a t i o n models i s t h e o b j e c t i v e function (or f u n c t ions in multiobjective optimization), and any " o p t i m a l " sblution derived i s c l e a r l y dependent on t h e assumptions and c r i t e r i a and t h e i r a s s o c i a t e d uncer t a i n t i es. Some of these u n c e r t a i n t i e s might be derived from the s e l e c t i o n o f model topology (structure), parameters ( c o e f f i c i e n t s ) , scope, or focus. Others m i g h t be r e l a t e d t o data, t h e o p t im i z a t i o n t e c h n i ques used t o solve the mathematical models, modular subjectivity, or the inabillty t o account i n t h e model f o r many o f t h e n o n q u a n t i t a t i v e and nontangible considerations. These factors and o t h e r s , such as t h e s e n s i t i v i t y o f t h e m o d e l s and t h e i r stability, have somehow caused s k e p t i c i s m about o p t i m i z a t i o n models and s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s in general among t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r s o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management. The term optima! solution essentially refers t o the best solution of t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l model assumpt i ons and under al1

constraints, whether explicitly s t a t e d or i m p l i c i t l y included i n the formulation. Clearly, then, the optimal solution i n d i c a t e d by t h e model may be f a r from, o r even have nothing t o do w i t h , the actual system's optimal solution. a1 1 these Recogn i z i n g difficulties, mathematical models have significantly expanded t h e a b i l i t y t o understand, plan, and manage our w a t e r r e s o u r c e s . Models are currently used t o i n v e s t i g a t e of water v i r t u a l l y every type resource problem, for smalland large-scale s t u d i e s and p r o j e c t s , and at a1 1 levels of decision-making. I n some c a s e s , m o d e l s have i n c r e a s e d t h e a c c u r a c y of estimates o f f u t u r e events t o a 1eve 1 f a r beyond " b e s t j udgement" decisions. I n o t h e r cases, they h a v e made p o s s i b l e a n a l y s e s t h a t c o u l d n o t b e performed e m p i r i c a l l y or w i t h o u t computer assistance. it Further, models have made feasible t o q u a n t i t a t i v e l y compare the l i k e l y effects of alternative resource decisions. Models a r e u s u a l l y v e r y u s e f u l f o r a n a l y z i n g complex w a t e r r e s o u r c e While many of the p r o b 1 ems. economic and s o c i a l f a c t o r s i n w a t e r resoures p l a n n i n g cannot be f u l l y enumerated, m o d e l s can b e used t o i n t e g r a t e t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a and provide estimates o f f u t u r e e f f e c t s and a c t i v i t i e s . Such e s t i m a t e s a r e highly useful i n evaluating the consequences of different a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s , and u s i n g them i s o f t e n less expensive than conducting comprehensive surveys o r u s i n g o t h e r t r a d i t i o n a l approaches. A prerequisite for a systems a n a l y s i s i s t h a t a l l t h e elements o f t h e system c a n be m o d e l e d e i t h e r I t is a n a l y t i c a l l y or c o n c e p t u a l l y . important t o d i s t i n g u i s h between A model i s t h e s y s t e m and m o d e l . mathemat i c a l and/or physical r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m and o f t h e r e l a t i o n s between t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e system. I t i s an a b s t r a c t i o n of the r e a l world, and, i n any p a r t i c u l a r application, the q u a l i t y of t h e model and t h u s o f systems

-9-

a n a l y s i s depends o n how w e l l the model b u i l d e r p e r c e i v e s t h e a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s and how w e l l he i s able to describe t h e i r functional f orm. S i n c e models a r e a b s t r a c t i o n s of reality, t h e y do n o t u s u a l l y describe all features that are encompassed by a real-world situation. A prerequisite for the systems analysis of a water r e s o u r c e s system i s t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e s y s t e m i n t e r m s o f component models w h i c h p e r m i t s o l u t i o n s t o b e obtained a t r e a s o n a b l e c o s t and w i t h i n a prescribed time frame. Therefore, t h e model b u ' i l d e r s h o u l d n o t a t t e m p t t o model t h e r e a l i t y o f individual components as c l o s e l y as p o s s i b l e , b u t o n l y as c l o s e l y as is necessary to meet the overall accuracy requirements for his s y s tern To i l l u s t r a t e : i f the o b j e c t i v e i s the design o f a l a r g e s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r f o r i r r i g a t i o n and water supply, it is quite u n n e c e s s a r y t o model the complete r u n o f f process. On t h e o t h e r hand, a model w e l l - s u i t e d for a storage reservoir, such as a monthly f l o w - g e n e r a t i o n model, is entirely u n s u i t e d f o r model i ng the peak discharges; When, f o r example, s h o u l d t h e e n g i n e e r who d e s i g n s a sanitary sewer system f o r a city employ a model o f n o n s t a t i o n a r y f l o w r o u t i n g ( s u c h as t h e c o m p l e t e S t . Venant e q u a t i o n s ) , and when i s i t s u f f i c i e n t t o design for stationary flows, for example, by just employing t h e concept o f normal d e p t h a n d M a n n i n g ' s e q u a t i o n ? The d i f f e r e n c e i n computer t i m e f o r the two methods i s v e r y l a r g e , and t h e s t a t e d q u e s t i o n i s a v a l i d one. important Hence, i t seems t h a t an a s p e c t o f model building i n the context o f systems a n a l y s i s i s t o find the best but permissible simplifications. Other r e a s o n s f o r s e a r c h i n g f o r a s i m p l e model may b e imposed b y a l a c k o r low q u a l i t y o f data. For example, a n o n l i n e a r u n i t h y d r o g r a p h model i s usually not u s e f u l because t h e v a r i a b i l i t y o f the r u n o f f c o e f f i c i e n t together w i t h the lack o f s u f f i c i e n t parallel measurements o f r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f impossible t o get e v e n t s make i t

calibrations that are accurate enough t o make t h e n o n l i n e a r i t y p e r c e p t i b l e i n a s t a t i s t i c a l sense. I n a recent study commissioned by the Office of Technology Assessment o f t h e Congress o f the (U.S. OTA 1982), a United States group o f l e a d i n g e x p e r t s assessed the c a p a b i l i t y o f surface-water flow and s u p p l y models, surface-water models, and g r o u n d w a t e r m o d e l s , the latter i n c l u d i n g b o t h q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y aspects. They were rated a c c o r d i ng to two criteria: reliability of the model and credibility of t h e model results. Models a r e c o n s i d e r e d reliable if they accurately describe the physical or chemical process f o r which they a r e designed. Credible results require both a reliable model and s u f i c i e n t d a t a t o run i t . Tables 1.1, 1.2, and 1 . 3 ( w h i c h a r e c o p i e s f r o m T a b l e s 2 , 3 , and 4 o f t h e OTA r e p o r t ) show t h e assessment for t h e t h r e e t y p e s o f models. The e v a l u a t i o n key is l i s t e d a t the bottom of the table. I t i s seen from Table 1.1 that the experts consider s u r f a c e - w a t e r m o d e l s t o be genera 1 1 y adequate, a 1 though c o n s i d e r a b l e improvement i s p o s s i b l e t o r a i s e most o f t h e m o d e l s f r o m a C ranking i n t o the A class. Roughly t h e same s t a t e o f a f f a i r s i s l i s t e d f o r t h e s u r f a c e - w a t e r q u a l i t y models and f o r g r o u n d w a t e r m o d e l s , but it must be r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e r a t i n g by c r e d i b i l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y a l o n e , w i t h o u t d u e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f economy and p o s i t i o n i n t h e c o n c e p t u a l f r a m e of t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m s , may n o t be s u f f i c i e n t f o r assessing t h e m o d e l s ' v a l u e f o r systems a n a l y s i s .

1.3

Levels of decision-making

Many w a t e r resource p r o j e c t s a r e v e r y l a r g e , and l a r g e sums o f money, very often public, are involved. They a r e c o m p e t i n g w i t h other needs f o r s o c i e t y , and t h e y i n f l u e n c e many o t h e r s e c t o r s o f the structure of society. Therefore, t h e d e c i s i o n process which leads t o the implementation of a water resources p r o j e c t t a k e a long t i m e and d e c i s i o n s a r e made o n levels po 1 i t i ca 1 and which are

-10-

socioeconomic r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l . The b a s i s f o r a d e c i s i o n on a water resources p r o j e c t i s a p l a n i n which the o b j e c t i v e s o f the p r o j e c t a r e o u t l i n e d as w e l l as t h e means b y w h i c h t h e y a r e t o be accomplished, t h e i r c o s t s , and t h e consequences o f t h e p r o j e c t i n t e r m s o f b e n e f i t s and adverse impacts. Water resources planning is the sum of all a c t i v i t i e s which l e a d t o such a plan. The larger t h e p r o j e c t and t h e more i n t e n s i v e t h e use o f the w a t e r r e s o u r c e s , t h e b r o a d e r becomes t h e scope o f t h e p l a n n i n g process. There a r e few water resources projects which have o n l y local consequences, and most o f them h a v e t o b e seen i n t h e b r o a d e r c o n t e x t o f regional or even national or It is i n t e r n a t i o n a l development. therefore tempting t o evolve a hierarchy of levels for water resources planning, with the h i e r a r c h y b e g i n n i n g a t a l e v e l where a l 1 possible projects are considered i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a g e n e r a l economic master plan for a country. Of course, a p l a n which comprises a l l political, econom i c , and s o c i o l o g i c a l development o b j e c t i v e s in detail i s neither useful nor manageable. Therefore, a national w a t e r p l a n must g e n e r a t e s u b p l a n s , which c o v e r more d e t a i l s f o r a narrower area. T y p i c a l o f such a h i e r a r c h y o f planning i s a d i v i s i o n into three for example, levels. I n the U.S., t h e f o l l o w i n g l e v e l s a r e promulgated Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l by the U.S.

( i i i ) Level C is implementation planning, where specific p r o j e c t designs a r e developed. C should General l y , Level B, because follow Level specific plans or recommendations f rom the L e v e l - B e f f o r t a r e implemented here.
Other c o u n t r i e s u s e d i f f e r e n t terminologies to describe the planning l e v e l s , b u t i n general one c a n i d e n t i f y t h r e e l e v e l s , and t h e s e are often associated w i t h d i f f e r e n t planning authorities. The first 1 eve 1 i n v o 1 ves international of water use, for agreements example, the a l l o c a t i o n o f water f r o m a r i v e r w h i c h f l o w s t h r o u g h two o r more c o u n t r i e s . A t t h i s level, n a t i o n a l water plans a r e a d j u s t e d t o international demands. These agreements a r e h a r d l y e v e r r e a c h e d on t h e b a s i s o f w a t e r resources development a l o n e , b u t i n v o l v e many different national interests. The second i s the national level. The purpose of water r e o u r c e s p l a n n i n g on t h i s l e v e l i s t o set p r i o r i t i e s for the long-term development of a country. An example i s t h e N a t i o n a l Water Plan 1977). of Hungary (David e t a l . I t s decision level is largely political and involves technical l i m i t e d scale, i n p u t s only on a u s u a l l y o n l y as f i n a n c i a l data or constraints. Although d e c i s i o n s on a national or international level a r e o f g r e a t consequence s i n c e t h e y s e t t h e s t r a t e g y f o r development, i n t h i s book t h e y a r e n o t g i v e n much room. A t these l e v e l s i t i s o f t e n d e c i d e d whether t o proceed w i t h t h e p l a n n i n g f o r a p r o j e c t , and w h e t h e r t o make f u n d s ( d i r e c t f i n a n c i n g o r matching funds) available for it. The p r o c e d u r e s f o r p l a n n i n g on t h e national level d i f f e r for d i f f e r e n t countries, and some d e t a i l s are g i v e n i n the i n t r o d u c t o r y s e c t i o n o f e a c h o f t h e appended c a s e s t u d i e s . The t h i r d level i s regional, i t s results being incorporated i n t o a regional water plan which i d e n t i f i e s water resources p r o j e c t s w i t h i n the c o n t e x t o f t h e d i f f e r e n t requirements imposed b y a l t e r n a t e

(1973)
(i)

Level A, a reconnaissance a g e n e r a l framework study or study. The t e m p o r a l horizon The i s a b o u t 30 t o 50 y e a r s . major purpose i s t o identify major problems o r p r o s p e c t i v e The area is p r o b 1 ems. generally very large. 1 Level B i s a comprehensive planning e f f o r t f o r a smaller region. This level should f o l l o w L e v e l A , where p r o b l e m s have a l r e a d y been i d e n t i f i e d . The t i m e h o r i z o n i s a b o u t 15 years.

(ii)

-11-

development p l a n s o f a r e g i o n . The (Case Maumee R i v e r s t u d y i n t h e USA o r t h e Marchfeld case i n Study 4) A u s t r i a (Nachtnebel et al. 1982) a r e examples o f such b r o a d - s c a l e r e g i o n a l water plans. The o b j e c t i v e o f such a s t u d y i s t o s e t p r i o r i t i e s and t o make recommendations f o r t h e allocation of different water resources t o d i f f e r e n t water u s e r s .

1.4 Stages in water resources planning

The systems d e f i n i t i o n s o f the previous section are applicable t o different types of planning p r o c e s s e s and t h e y a r e n o t s p e c i f i c t o water r e s o u r c e s systems. This l i e s i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e systems approach, and i n c l a s s i f y i n g w a t e r resources systems we have to recognize b o t h t h e general aspects of a l l systems and t h e s p e c i f i c aspects of water resources. Most t y p i c a l o f t h e l a t t e r i s t h e use o f classification by purpose. The purpose of a water r e s o u r c e s system may be w a t e r s u p p l y , irrigation, flood control, hydropower generation, or navigation: or some or a l l of t h e s e p u r p o s e s may b e combined i n m u l t i p u r p o s e p r o j e c t s . In the systems framework, this c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s not very useful because t h e systems models f o r t h e s e purposes a r e v e r y s i m i l a r i n t h e i r formal aspects. The major differences lie in constraints (which a r i s e f r o m r e s t r i c t i o n s on i n d i v i d u a l purposes), in objective functions (with d i f f e r e n t societal and economic g o a l s t o be a c h i e v e d for d i f f e r e n t p u r p o s e s ) , and i n t h e design aspects.

i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y financed a c t i v i t y , a l t h o u g h i n t h i s book emphasis i s o n planning e f f o r t s a t a national or regional scale. Thus, when we s e t up a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by stages o f t h e i t m u s t be b r o a d planning process incorporate and f l e x i b l e enough t o of water all these properties r e s o u r c e s p r o j e c t s and t o p e r m i t a n a l y s i s b y any s u i t a b l e s y s t e m s A analysis t e c h n ique. c l a s s i f i c a t i o n which makes this possible i s p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s book and i s d e p i c t e d i n F i g u r e 1 . 1 . I t i d e n t i f i e s the f o l l o w i n g stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g process: Stage 1: The p r o j e c t initiation stage, which begins w i t h t h e statement of needs and i nc 1 udes prel i m i nary p l a n n i n g t h a t ends w i t h the d e c i s i o n o n how t o p r o c e e d . Stage 2: The data collection stage, i n which data a r e gathered f o r s y s t e m model development and decision-making. Stage The process of 3: the final determ n i n g in p r o j ec configuration, which a l l a l t e r n a t i v e s are small i n v e s t g a t e d and a number o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e a n d p r o m i s ng a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e select d for d e t a i 1 ed analysis.

A second c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s by stages o f t h e t i m e sequence o f t h e p l a n n i n g process. The scope o f the p l a n n i n g process i n water r e s o u r c e s can v a r y f r o m t h e v e r y b r o a d - b a s e d a water preliminary planning of resources p r o j e c t , which f o l l o w s t h e p a r t i a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a need f o r action, to the more detailed evaluation o f a selected physical project (a " f e a s i b i 1 i t y " study). The p r o j e c t may b e f i n a n c e d or s u p p o r t e d by p r i v a t e p a r t i e s , o r i t may be p a r t o f a large-scale,

The p r o c e s s o f p l a n n i n g S t a g e 4: i n detail. I n t h i s stage, the design parameters, operation rules, cost , benef i t s , etc., of the alternatives selected in Stage 3 a r e determined, and the final project configuration i s selected. T h i s phase r e p e a t s , i n more s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l d e t a i l , t h e p l a n n i n g o f S t a g e s 2 and 3, and o f t e n i s p e r f o r m e d b y a different team of planners. Stage

5:

The d e s i g n s t a g e , in which the final configuration i s translated i n t o d e s i g n documents.

-12-

Note t h a t Stage 5 i s not a direct p a r t o f t h e water resources i t mostly p l a n n i n g process, since i n v o 1v e s structural and other if a project is of details, s t r u c t u r a l nature. I n many p r o j e c t s which a r e n o n s t r u c t u r a l , t h i s stage the does n o t e x i s t , f o r example, i f changes o f f u n c t i o n s f o r an e x i s t i n g p r o j e c t a r e analyzed. W therefore e s h a l l not d i s c u s s Stage 5 i n t h i s book. This classification into five stages i s o n l y one o f many s i m i l a r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and i s n o t t h e o n l y one w h i c h i s i n general use. For example in international project p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s s u c h as t h e ones u s e d b y t h e W o r l d Bank o r o t h e r project planning and financing agencies for developing c o u n t r i e s , a g r o u p i n g by stages i s used w h i c h e s s e n t i a l l y combines S t a g e s 2 and 3 into a prefeasibility study, which f orms the basis for funding d e c i s i o n s , and w h i c h a l s o combines some a s p e c t s o f S t a g e s 2 and 4 i n t o a f e a s i b i l i t y study that provides the basis for the f i n a l financial d e c i s i o n s t h a t a r e made b e f o r e t h e project i s d e s i g n e d and e x e c u t e d . However, most national projects subdivide themselves into five stages i n a n a t u r a l manner, s i n c e each s t a g e i n v o l v e s d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and a n a l y s t s . The s t a g e s o f the planning p r o c e s s encompass p l a n n i n g a t each o f the l e v e l s described i n section 1.5. B u t , whereas t h e l e v e l s r e f e r mostly to the decision-making agencies, t h e s t a g e s a r e seen more f r o m t h e l o g i c o f systems a n a l y s i s . There e x i s t , therefore, important differences. However, l e v e l s and stages form a network o f the d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s , and t h e y interact and are strongly interdependent. This requi res a structured administration i n which, at all l e v e l s and s t a g e s , a u t h o r i t i e s (and responsibilities) are a s s i gned, procedures o f i n f o r m a t i o n exchange of legal actions are and established, and procedures of i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the users o f a water resources project are developed. D i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s have

generated a d m i n i s t r a t i v e procedures of different kinds, as is exemplified i n t h e case s t u d i e s . O t h e r examples a r e g i v e n f o r v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s b y Jamieson (19791, by W i 1 1 iams (1984) f o r the United Kingdom, and b y Shamir (1983) for Israel

I n terms o f water resources p l a n n i n g and o p e r a t i o n , a country may be c o n s i d e r e d d e v e l d p e d i f i t has an administrative structure which guarantees ' c a r e f u l o p e r a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e o f c o m p l e t e d systems and w h i c h has s u f f i c i e n t f l e x i b i l i t y to adjust to changing needs. Indeed, a good case c a n b e made f o r assigning a high p r i o r i t y t o the establishment o f a w e l l - f u n c t i o n i n g water administration with strong powers of regulation and a well-trained maintenance staff, g i v i n g i t a much h i g h e r p r i o r i t y than the p r o d u c t i o n o f a large-scale project. C o u n t r i e s t h a t have an already-developed water resources administration that could evolve w i t h the advent o f large-scale water p r o j e c t s h a v e c e r t a i n l y been i n a more f o r t u n a t e p o s i t i o n . They have been more aware o f t h e consequences and l i m i t a t i o n s o f w a t e r resources projects than countries w i t h 1 i t t l e o r no a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e w h i c h s u d d e n l y have been c o n f r o n t e d w i t h t h e task o f a d m i n i s t e r i n g a huge water p r o j e c t fashioned through the w i l l o f well-meaning politicians, the finances o f an i n t e r n a t i o n a l f u n d i n g agency, t h e p l a n n i n g o f an international consultant f i r m , and the construction crews of a multinational contractor!

A well-designed plan for a water resources project should r e q u i r e t h e e x e c u t i o n o f each o f t h e stages, a l l o w i n g enough t i m e and r e s o u r c e s i n f u n d i n g and manpower t o p r o v i d e a s o l i d base f o r d e c i s i o n . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , such a c a r e f u l study of a project is usually not possible, sometimes because of l i m i t e d f u n d s b u t more o f t e n due t o time limitations. Partly this is caused by t h e l a c k o f data: e.g., l o n g records of r u n o f f d a t a t h a t a r e based on a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t number of years of runoff

-13-

measurement a r e o f t e n n o t a v a i l a b l e , and measurement o f l a c k i n g d a t a c a n only s t a r t during o r a t best s h o r t l y before planning. I n e a r l i e r times, a t h e p l a n n i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f large water p r o j e c t took decades, during which time additional data could be gathered. But today, particularly in developing c o u n t r i e s , t h e d a t a base does n o t exist, and t h e t i m e h o r i z o n i s so short t h a t the planner finishes his j o b o n l y j u s t b e f o r e the c o n t r a c t o r takes o v e r . Even i f t h e p l a n n e r c a n continue the data-gathering phase d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , methods a r e so efficient that the project is c o m p l e t e d i n a few y e a r s i n s t e a d o f decades. Population pressure or n a t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s a l s o may impose t i m e c o n s t r a i n t s . The n e t r e s u l t i s t h a t S t a g e 2 o f t e n i s done o n l y on a l i m i t e d s c a l e , and i s done as p a r t o f S t a g e s 3 and 4 . Other cases e x i s t w h i c h may make S t a g e 4 u n n e c e s s a r y because t h e one s o l u t i o n o f t h e w a t e r resources project i s obvious or, as i s t h e case i n many densely populated countries ( f o r example, i n W e s t e r n E u r o p e ) , t h e r e e x i s t many t y p e s o f projects which a r e so n a r r o w l y c o n s t r a i n e d by d i f f e r e n t interests that a p a r t i c u l a r option i s the only f e a s i b l e one.

understood clearly that the operation r u l e r e s u l t i n g from t h e planning process is a first approximation only: experience w i t h t h e a c t u a l p r o j e c t w i l l have t o b e incorporated i n t o improved r u l e s . The planner must a l l o w enough f l e x i b i l i t y for later adjustments, b e c a u s e most o p e r a t i o n rules are d e v e l o p e d o n t h e b a s i s o f some k i n d it is very o f a forecast, and unlikely that the r e a l world w i l l b e h a v e as p r e d i c t e d during the planning.

1.5 The planning process

The d e f i n i t i o n o f the five stages of planning yields a conceptual model of the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , w h i c h i s shown i n F i g u r e 1.1. H e r e , t h e s t a g e s a r e shown as a sequential decision p a r t of process, i n which t h e t a s k s t o be executed in each stage are represented by boxes and the connecting l i n e s denote decisions t o be t a k e n , or the information flow w h i c h i s passed on, f r o m one s t a g e t o t h e n e x t . The d i r e c t i o n o f t h e information flow is i n d i c a t e d by arrows. However, the connecting lines are only schematic, and a d d i t i o n a l f e e d b a c k l o o p s may e x i s t . The other stages, such as c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n , a r e n o t part of t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as defined here. I n f a c t , i t m u s t be

1.1 applies to all Figure l e v e l s of planning, perhaps w i t h some of t h e stages combined o r omitted. I t does not give i n f o r m a t i o n o n how t h e s t a g e s a r e t o b e e x e c u t e d o r what methods a r e t o be used. I n most c o u n t r i e s or organizations, the p l ann i n g r e g u l a t i o n s or r u l e s g i v e n t o water resources p anning boards are s p e l l e d o u t i n more d e t a i l . As a n example, in he FRG t h e p l a n n i n g process is described for the national and r e g i o n a l levels by public laws which mostly are intended t o s e t procedures f o r t h e process o f approving p r o j e c t s , w h i l e t h e stages o f p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g for some t y p e s o f p r o j e c t s a r e o u t l i n e d i n standards (for example, the reservoir planning process is s p e l l e d o u t i n s t a n d a r d Nos. DIN 19700-10, i n which a procedure i s described which roughly corresponds t o t h e stages o f our F i g u r e 1.1). These laws and r e g u l a t i o n s a r e n o t expressions o f national objectives, but other c o u n t r i e s have included such national objectives. For the Principles and examp 1 e, Standards o f t h e Water Resources Council of t h e U.S. are rather explicit i n the p r i o r i t i e s that are t o be used i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . The planner must realize that o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s may s h i f t due t o the s h i f t s i n v a l u e judgments o r d e v e l o p m e n t o b j e c t i v e s , and t h i s i s part of the uncertainties (called the "strategic uncertainties" by K i s i e l and D u c k s t e i n (1972)) w h i c h he has t o a l l o w f o r .
the I t w i l l be t h e p u r p o s e o f f o l l o w i n g chapters t o describe the

stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g process in more d e t a i l and t o interpret the boxes o f Figure 1.1. The g e n e r a l procedure f o r the planning o f a p r o j e c t u s u a l l y begins w i t h the designing of a diagram o f the physical system, consisting of geographical maps showing the l o c a t i o n s o f demand and s u p p l y as typical w e l l as t h e l o c a t i o n s of structures and t h e i r connections. Such a map (as i s appended i n more o r l e s s s i m p l i f i e d f o r m t o each o f t h e case studies) forms t h e b a s i s for a system d i a g r a m - a b l o c k d i a g r a m o f t h e system. This block d i a g r a m r e p r e s e n t s t h e system i n i t s state of operation. The p r o c e s s described i n Figure 1.1 i s then t h e p r o c e s s o f m o d i f y i n g and q u a n t i f y i n g (of t h e i n i t i a l l y c o n c e i v e d system Stage 1) t h r o u g h Stages 2 t o 5 t o i t s f i n a l design. I t i s useful t o consider Figure 1 . 1 as a g u i d e b y w h i c h t o a p p r o a c h t h e p l a n n i n g process. However, t h e p r o c e d u r e does not g u a r a n t e e t h e quality of the r e s u l t s of the p l a n n i ng; t his depends on t h e c o r r e c t n e s s o f t h e system e l e m e n t s and of the data describing the system. I t i s necessary t o o b t a i n a l l . t h e needed i n f o r m a t i o n o n each o f t h e s y s t e m e l e m e n t s b e f o r e any system a n a l y s i s i s t o be performed. F o r t h i s , c h e c k l i s t s a r e sometimes used. However, even the best c h e c k l i s t s and p l a n n i n g s c h e d u l e s c a n o n l y b e a g u i d e , and t h e y m u s t be used with care and discrimination. They can supplement, but not replace, the ski 11 and intuition of the e x p e r i e n c e d and c r e a t i v e p l a n n e r . He m u s t d e c i d e o n t h e v a r i a b l e s and the values of constants and parameters, he identifies and decides on the importance of constraints, he d e t e r m i n e s t h e m o s t appropriate state transition function of logical or structural And, f i n a l 1 y, no e 1 emen t s hard-and-fast r u l e s e x i s t o n what p l a n n i n g p r o c e d u r e s a r e t o b e used: t h e f i n d i n g o f t h e b e s t approach for addressing t h e p l a n n i n g process i s a d i f f i c u l t problem i n i t s e l f .

1.6

Advantages and (current) disadvantages of the systems approach to water resources

Analysis of water resources systems and w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g for such a n a l y s i s a r e v e r y o l d in fact, the vast activities i r r i g a t i o n p r o j e c t s o f Mesopotamia o r Egypt o r C h i n a , b u i l t w e l l b e f o r e times, were t h e beginning o f our certainly done with careful p l a n n i n g , b a s e d on l o n g o b s e r v a t i o n s and e x p e r i e n c e . Such systems were subject to improvement over centuries by trial and error, l i n k i n g the society o f the country and i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s to the of water and the management resources. u t i l i z a t i o n o f the water And t h u s i t has b e e n t h r o u g h t h e But, in spite of the ages. important r o l e which water resources p 1 ayed in the deve 1 opment development o f some c o u n t r i e s , it has o n l y b e e n t h r o u g h t h e e f f o r t s i n o t h e r areas o f p l a n n i n g t h a t t h e analytical background f o r modern systems a n a l y s i s has been c r e a t e d (Rogers 1980). Therefore, modern systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s have entered the planning o f water r e s o u r c e s systems d u r i n g t h e s i x t i e s (Maass e t a l . 1962; H a l l and Dracup 1969; Buras 1972). Systems analysis proponents have e s t a b l i s h e d t h e s c i e n c e of water r e s o u r c e s systems a n a l y s i s with an enthusiasm which is u n s u r p a s s e d b y any o t h e r a r e a s o f w a t e r r e s e a r c h , so t h a t t o d a y a v a s t expertise exists t o optimize real (and imagi ned) water resources systems. The reason for this understood, enthusiasm i s e a s i l y because s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s opened u p t h e murky field of decision-making i n water resources eng i neer i ng, hand 1 ed u p t o t h e n o n 1 y b y i n t u i t i o n and e x p e r i e n c e (so i t seemed), to the clarity that mathematics gives to analysis so to the processes, and introduction o f objectivity into what seemed t o be s u b j e c t i v e and i n some cases arbitrary decision A b r e a k t h r o u g h was made processes. p o s s i b l e b y t h e computer and its to work with large capability

-15-

amounts o f d a t a and t o s o l v e c o m p l e x mathematical problems. With this c a p a b i l i t y , the systems f o r m u l a t i o n was q u a n t i f i a b l e , and t h e a d v a n t a g e s of systems analysis could be As r e a l i z e d t o the f u l l extent. t i m e passes, t h e systems a p p r o a c h w i l l assert i t s e l f . New g e n e r a t i o n s of computers, i nc 1 u d i ng m i n i c o m p u t e r s , become a v a i l a b l e t o the engineer to increase his p l a n n i n g c a p a b i l i t y o n h i s desk, and to increase the efficiency of o p e r a t i o n through a d a p t i v e c o n t r o l s , f o r e c a s t i n g t e c h n i q u e s , and a d a p t i v e for al1 factors a c c o u n t i ng i n f l u e n c i n g the system o p e r a t i o n . The systems a p p r o a c h becomes a necessary p 1 ann i ng i ns t rumen t because i t seems t o be t h e o n l y way to i n t e g r a t e t h e many i s s u e s w h i c h the water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r must consider i n h i s p l a n . Environmental protection, the issues o f water quality for human well-being, requirements of recreational use, t h e i s s u e s o f c o n f l i c t i n g demands o n scarce water resources - f o r a l l of these problem areas, s o l u t i o n s have t o be f o u n d w h i c h m u s t be a b l e t o withstand the scrutiny of professional e x p e r t s and of an increasingly well-informed and critical public. Many o f these p e o p l e h a v e seen t h e f a i l u r e s of c o n v e n t i o n a l l y planned p r o j e c t s i n w h i c h a s i n g l e p u r p o s e was f o l l o w e d without r e g a r d t o impacts on o t h e r areas, Examples of detrimental i m p a c t s a r e r e s e r v o i r and r i v e r - b e d sedimentation, abuse o f w a t e r in i r r i g a t e d areas generated by the a p p a r e n t l y abundant s u p p l y o f w a t e r from i r r i g a t i o n works, and w a t e r p o l l u t i o n by i n d u s t r y and c i t i e s . These a r e o n l y a f e w examples o f t h e negative consequences of a sectorially o r iented and noncomprehensive approach t o w a t e r resources planning. On t e c h n i c a l grounds, t h e main advantages o f t h e systems a p p r o a c h i n w a t e r resources planning are:

accounts for a l l the sectors which influence or are i n f l u e n c e d by a water resources p r o j e c t .

2. The l e v e l o f p e r f o r m a n c e o f a system, as measured against c e r t a i n performance standards, can be quantified, a1 l o w i n g the incorporation of risk and uncer t a i n t y in t o the dec i s i o n process.

3. I t becomes f e a s i b l e t o make complex m o d e l s o f real-world water r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m s so t h a t a much lower degree o f abstraction and s i m p l i f i c a t i o n i s necessary than i n c o n v e n t i o n a l approaches. T h i s i s an advantage which is a necessary prerequisite f o r addressing issues, in particular those of a mu 1 t i o b j e c t i v e and mu 1 t i p u r p o s e nature.
The v e r y a d v a n t a g e o f being a b l e t o h a n d l e l a r g e and c o m p l i c a t e d p l a n n i n g p r o j e c t s i s a l s o t h e main d isadvantage of the systems approach. F i r s t of a l l , there i s t h e problem o f the q u a l i t y and quantity of d a t a w h i c h may b e required, w i t h a l l the limitations s e t b y f u n d i n g and t i m e f o r d a t a acqui s i t i o n . This problem 'is Then t h e r e discussed i n C h a p t e r 3. is the problem that the decision-maker may f i n d himself confronted w i t h a selection of decisions t h a t are n o t obvious t o h i m and w h i c h have b e e n o b t a i n e d b y a n a l y t i c a l p r o c e d u r e s t h a t he c a n n o t understand without i n v e s t i ng substantial effort, f o r w h i c h he u s u a l l y has no t i m e . And s y s t e m s hem i n t o x i c a t e d a n a l y s t s , many o f by t h e i r c o m p u t e r s , a r e n o t h e l p f u l ; communication i n p a i n language, o r t h e engineers, i n t h e language o f than seems t o b e more d i f f i c u l t mathematical solving comp 1 ex problems. T h e dec s i o n - m a k e r v i e w s suspicion, or the r e s u l t s w i t h worse, w i t h a f a l s e confidence t h a t may n o t b e j u s t i f i e d because o f p l a n n i n g e r r o r s (which happens!) or t h e use o f models w h i c h have n o t been d e v e l o p e d f a r enough t o p e r m i t the conclusions f o r which they are used.

1. O b j e c t i v e s can b e s t a t e d quantitatively, often in analytical t e r m s , and o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s and constraints can be formulated, p e r m i t t i n g g e n e r a t i o n of a p l a n t h a t

A t this stage it seems worthwhile t o l i s t some o f t h e more commonly p e r c e i v e d s h o r t c o m i n g s of s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s as a p p l i e d t o w a t e r resources planning; we c a n t h e n a n a l y z e t r e n d s i n t h e development o f systems a n a l y s i s aimed a t o v e r c o m i n g these d i f f i c u l t i e s . Following are t h e major sources o f t h e s k e p t i c i s m t h a t many a g e n c i e s have a b o u t the p o s s i b i l i t y o f a c t u a l l y implementing systems methodologies in water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management:
(i)

v a r i o u s t h e o r i e s and c o n c e p t s , such a s d e c i s i o n t h e o r y , game theory, u t i l i t y theory, fuzzy set theory, vector optimization, and s i m u l a t i o n w i t h i n t e r a c t i v e modes.

( i i i ) "Narrow" vs. "total" models. A b a s i c concept b e i n g preached s tudent s of systems to

analysis i s that, for the analysis of a s y s t e m t o be m e a n i n g f u l , t h e whole system s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d . Yet, most well-documented simulation and m a t h e m a t i c a l models o f w a t e r systems a r e aimed a t i n v e s t i g a t i n g n a r r o w , s p e c i f i c , and s e l e c t e d a s p e c t s o f a regional water resources By v i r t u e o f t a c k l i n g system. one p a r t o f t h e p r o b l e m w h i l e assuming knowledge o f o t h e r parts, these models a r e o f t e n o n e - s i d e d and u s u a l l y do n o t r e p r e s e n t t h e o v e r a l l system behavior. The r e a s o n t h e y a r e oversimpl i f ied can be e x p l a i n e d by t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f solving the problem o f u s i n g c o n v e n t i o n a l systems a n a l y s i s tools t o model a l a r g e - s c a l e , complex system. The f u t u r e trend is toward modi f y i ng e x i s t i n g models t o i n c o r p o r a t e them i n t o the analysis o f the total system. T h i s can b e done by us i ng hierarchical-multilevel structures that r e l a t e and the v a r i ous coord in a t e submode 1 s and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e t o t a l system. (iv) Lack o f d a t a p l a n n i n g . In many c o u n t r i e s t h e r e has been a l a c k o f i n t e r a c t i o n between data-collection a g e n c i e s and those in charge o f water resources p l ann i ng and management. T h e r e i s an a c u t e need f o r a n a l y t i c a l f r a m e w o r k s capable o f evaluating the w o r t h o f d a t a f o r an o p t i m a l data-collection system (with respect to collecting, p r o c e s s i n g , d i s s e m i n a t i n g , and projecting future data In addition, these demands). operational frameworks ought

S i n g l e-vs. mu 1 t i p l e - o b j e c t i v e mode 1 s . S i n g l e - o b j e c t i v e - f u n c t i o n modhave dominated most e1s in water past s t u d i es Yet the resources planning. many competing and often goa 1 s and conf 1 i c t i n g objectives of almost every water r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m make such models i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h r e a l it y and theref ore A water unacceptable. r e s o u r c e s agency may n o t f i n d models w i t h a s i n g l e - o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n t o b e a c c e p t a b l e as a decision-making tool if, for the p r o b 1 em it examp 1 e, a t tempts to model is characterized by multiple noncommensurable objectives Fu tur e water and goals. r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g models a r e 1 ik e l y to encompass multiple-objective functions in their noncommensurable units.
" S o f t " vs. "hard" elements i n modeling. There i s a growing need to include in the modeling considerations the s o - c a 1 1 ed " s o f t " e 1 ements s u c h as s o c i e t y , politics, legal aspects, and the the environment - along w i t h as "hard" elements such econom i cs and the p h y s i c a l - t e c h n o l o g i c a l system. Consequently, new a p p r o a c h e s and m e t h o d o l o g i e s c a p a b l e o f coping w i t h these complex " h a r d " and " s o f t " e l e m e n t s and b r i d g i n g t h e gap b e t w e e n them a r e b e i n g developed. These new a p p r o a c h e s a r e b a s e d o n

(ii )

t o be r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e needs o f p l a n n e r s f o r management of water and related land systems. (VI Lack o f i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the decision-makers. Water r e s o u r c e s y s t e m s a n a l y s e s have o f t e n been done i n i s o l a t i o n from the decision-makers and commissioned agencies r e s p o n s i b l e f o r , and i n c h a r g e of, implementing t h e r e s u l t s of these analyses. Trends i n d i c a t e t h a t more emphasis i s b e i n g placed on c o n s t r u c t i n g m o r e - r e a l i s t i c models t h a t a r e acceptable to these decision-makers and a g e n c i e s . C 1o s e r communication and cooperation between systems analysts and national and local agencies should be established. Lack of follow-up in implementation. The m a j o r i t y of s t u d i e s o f water resources systems a r e c o n d u c t e d b y one group or agency and implemented, if at all, by another. This 1 ack of c o n t i n u i t y and f o l l o w - u p of t h e s t u d y b y t h e m o d e l e r s and systems a n a l y s t s o f t e n r e s u l t s i n misunderstandings o f the m o d e l s by t h e implementing agencies. Most i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e e x p e r i e n c e and know-how g a i n e d by m o d e l e r s and systems analysts are not u t i l i z e d w h e r e t h e y a r e b a d l y needed. Again, the trend i s in the d i r e c t i on of more communication between t h e two g r o u p s so t h a t a c l o s e d - l o o p operation replaces the present open-loop one.

o f whether a l l s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s a r e a c c o u n t e d f o r , and w h e t h e r t h e numerical values of t h e parameters and c o e f f i c i e n t s w h i c h a r e used a r e o f t h e r i g h t magnitude. Since t h e systems a n a l y s t u s u a l l y does not have t h e b r o a d e x p e r i e n c e r e q u i r e d for such insights and the e x p e r i enced eng i neer ( p l a n n e r ) d o e s n o t know enough about planning techniques, i t i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r a successful planning e f f o r t t h a t decision-makers, systems a n a l y s t s , work and engineers (planners) together i n an a t m o s p h e r e o f m u t u a l t r u s t and w i l l i n g n e s s t o l e a r n . I n s u c h an a t m o s p h e r e , the advantages of systems analysis g r e a t l y outweigh i t s disadvantages, and b y l e a v i n g t h e p r o b l e m s w h i c h cannot be r e s o l v e d b y p r e s e n t l y a v a i l a b l e techniques outside o f the system model and e v a l u a t i n g its aspects separately by conventional methods, t h e systems a n a l y s t c a n substantially improve t h e p l a n n i n g process w i thout i n s p i r i ng a confidence t h a t i s not j u s t i f i e d . I t is difficult t o speculate how systems analysis i n water resources w i l l develop in the future. The systems a p p r o a c h is used t o s o l v e t h e o l d problems o f water resources, b u t on a h i g h e r l e v e l than t h e "old" techniques. W e m u s t assume t h a t t h e r e a r e h i g h e r l e v e l s s t i l l t o be f o u n d - b u t we d o n o t know o f them, j u s t as the p l a n n e r s o f y e s t e r d a y d i d n o t know: B u t we v e n t u r e t o p r e d i c t t h a t t h e f o r e s e e a b l e development w i l l be i n the direction of closing the c o m m u n i c a t i o n s gap and m a k i n g t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s more t r a n s p a r e n t . will Mathematical system models evolve i n t o a s u p p o r t framework f o r decision-making that i nc 1 u d e s numerous s m a l l e r m o d e l s t h a t a r e self-contained and d e s i g n e d t o b e u s e d i n t e r a c t i v e l y by a n a l y s t s and policy-makers a t different levels. Better physical models, better be developed. economic m o d e l s w i l l Minicomputers and interactive be u s e d to make software w i l l d e c i s i o n s more t r a n s p a r e n t and h e l p decisions t o be a c c o m p l i s h e d in sess i o n s of experts who are

(vi)

I n systems a n a l y s i s , i t i s n o t t h e model i n i t s e l f t h a t c o u n t s , b u t i t s performance. As was p o i n t e d o u t above, t o cast a r e a l - w o r l d problem i n t o t h e framework most s u i t e d f o r a c e r t a i n type of analysis very o f t e n involves the s i m p l i f i c a t i o n o f the problem i n c e r t a i n areas. Are t h e s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s permissible? This i s an i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n , b u t n o t n e a r l y as i m p o r t a n t as t h e q u e s t i o n

-18-

the common l a n g u a g e systems a n a l y s i s .

required

by

Water Resources, Jerusalem. K i s i e l , C., Duckstein, eds. Proceed i n g s , International Symposium on Uncertainties i n H y d r o l o g y and W a t e r R e s o u r c e s , Tucson, A r i z . and L .

T h e r e w i l l a l s o be d e v e l o p m e n t s a t the higher levels of planning, d i c t a t e d b y needs o f e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g c o m p l e x i t i e s o f economic and s o c i a l institutions for which water resources p r o j e c t s provide p a r t o f the infrastructure. For example: a t t h e r e g i o n a l l e v e l , a hydropower project i s a part of the local e l e c t r i c power s u p p l y system: a t t h e i t becomes p a r t o f national level, a t h e energy supply system of country: and a t the international level, i t i s part o f international compound e n e r g y g r i d s y s t e m s . Such large-scale systems may require large efforts i n c o l l e c t i n g and s t o r i n g data, which w i l l lead t o t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f v a s t d a t a banks a t a l l planning levels. And a t a l l l e v e l s t h e r e w i l a c o n t i n u i n g need t o r e v i e w planning decisions of. yesterday the light of developments evolutions of the social economic f a b r i c o f t h e c o u n t r y , of t h e needs and demands w h i c h placed on t h e water resources o f region.

1972.

Maass, A., e t a l . 1962. D e s i g n o f Water Resources Systems. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

I . B o g a r d i , and L. N a c h t n e b e l , H., 1982. Duckstein. Mu1 t i c r i t e r i o n anal ys i s for regional water resources development. In Proceedings, I F l P WG 7.1 W o r k i n g C o n f e r e n c e , E n v i r o n m e n t a l Systems A n a l y s i s and Management (Rome, Italy, 28-30 September, 1981). N o r t h - H o l l a n d , New Y o r k .
R o g e r s , P. 1980. Role o f systems a n a l y s i s as a t o o l i n water p o l i c y , p l a n n i n g a n d management. I n U n i t e d N a t i o n s , R e p o r t o f UF; Workshop, Water Resources P 1 ann i ng: Experiences in a N a t i o n a l and R e g i o n a l Context. Castelgandolfo and Stresa, Italy. S h a m i r , U. 1983. Experiences in multiobjective planning and management o f w a t e r resources systems. Hydrological Sciences J o u r n a 1 , 28 :77-92.

l be the in and and and are the

1.7

References

Buras, N. 1972. The S c i e n t i f i c A l l o c a t i o n o f Water Resources. E l s e v i e r , New York/Amsterdam.

L. Duckstein, and R . David, L . , Krysztofowict. 1977 * Multiobjective planning of runoff regulation under u n c e r t a i n water demands. In o f t h e 1 s t I n ' l Conf. on Proc. Applied Numerical Modelling, Univ. of Southampton, July 1977, PP* 13-22.
H a l l , W. A., and J . Dracup. 1969. Water Resources Systems Engineering. McGraw-Hill, New Y o r k , NY. Jamieson, D . G. 1979. Planning, d e s i g n and o p e r a t i o n o f w a t e r resources s y s terns. Int. Conference on Operations Research in Agr i c u l t u r e and

U.S.

OTA-U.S. Congress, O f f i c e o f 1982. Technology Assessment. Use of Models for Water Resources Management, P l a n n i n g , and P o l i c y . U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

U.S.

Resources Counci 1 . Water and R e l a t e d Land Resources, Establishment of P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s for P l a n n i n g , Washington, D . C . Water

1973.

Williams, C. 1984. Hydrological aspects in integrated river bas i n development. xvi i I General Assembly of the IUGG, 1 5 - 2 7 August 1983, Hamburg, F R G .

- 19S/o,qe I

Plan iniliation arid preliniinary planning (Chapter 2)

Sto,qe 2

Data collection and processing (Chapter 3)

t
Slage 3

Formulation and screening o f project alternatives

Generation o f alternatives I

...............................

?
I
I I

I
I

I I I

Oprirnizatior Multiobjec/ive anulysis Hierurchical unolysis elc.

Methods:

I
Negotiations

Interaction with:
gineers, hydrologists, elc.

I I I I
0

Pirhlic O / h e r unencies

I I I

resolution

+ I

I I

End o f prcfeasibility study

Selected project alternatives

Political process

1 Abort

Detailed formulation o f projects

Slage 4

1
Model building and model analysis

Development o f linal study results

Design parameters for structures

Operation rules, operation niodels

End of feasibility study

Stage 5

Design Construction Operation

Fig. 1.1 Stages in the water resources planning process

Table 1.1 Surface water flow and supply model evaluation

~

. .

.~

-~

Issue .~
~

~. . . ...

_ ~ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ Information required for applications -~

a. Flood peaks for channel and bridge ,jesign b. Flood hydrographs for reserdoir design and operation c. Simultaneous flood hydrograchs for floor: contrcl system 'jesi;n

Overall rating B

Water avallsbillty: 1. Flood forecasting and control

C
C

and 3peratiin d. Flood depth mapping for flood plain land-use planr.ing e. Effects of land use on dowqstream flcws for ups:ream land-(;se pianning 1. Flood peaks after dam failures for emergency preparedness planning 0. Soil moisture conditions for land drainage design

C
C

D C
C B C
A

2. Drolight and low.flGw river

forecasting

a. Low river flows for offstream uses b. Timing of drought sequences for estimating cumulative x o f i o m i c irrpact c. Soil moisture conditions for precipitation-supplied uses

3. Streamf!ow regula!ion (incl cdi n g r e s e r a rs)

a. Runoff #olurne for maximum obtainable yield

b. Rurlcff time patterns (within ane a r s n p years) :or reserfoir siz!ng

c. Simultaneous runoff volumes in regional streams !or regional water supply planning
4. lnstream flow needs

C
C

Fish and Wiid!ife

Rec:ea:ion

Nav!pation

Hydrodlectricity

a. Low river flows for estimating fish supprrrl potential b. W;thin.yea: timing of low flows for fish iifecycle ma!chinp c . Timing of drought sequences for es:imating minimum reservoir or lake ievels d. Flow .velocities within streams !or estimating ef:ects on fish specres a. LDW river flcws for sus!a!cing rec:ea!icn capacily and es:he!ic appeal b. Timing of flow sequences 'or matching with recrea!icn periods c. Runoff time patterns (w!thm and among years) for es!irr,ar:ng the impact of fluclua!icns in lake !evels a. Low river flows for determining wa!e?kay capacity b. High river flows for deter-icing navigalion ;nterfe:ence c. Formatior, of sueace ice for determining navigation inter'erexe a. Timing of flow sequences for es?ima!ing run.of-the-rive: generating capacity b. Runoff time patterns (within and among years) for des,gnii:g streamf!ow regu!a!cons c. Simultanecus rlrnoff volumes i n rei;ional streams for CeGional Seie'ating sys:en planning a. Timing of .#ater use for deiivery sys!en design b. Wa!er presEues thioughout delivery system for deiiverf sys!em design c . Volune o f use for sizing supply 'aciiities d. Re!url flow ,vo:umes fcr .?esign:ng ,waste'&a!er zoiier!;6n 5ysre.r.s a. TirC.ins cf ,va!er use ' o r de!iverf sys:en design b. Voiume of use for sizing suppiy facilities c. Re:urn flow tolirmes ' o r drainage i y s : e T 6esign a. Volume of 1ndus:r:aI use for s u i n g supply facilities

8 B C
C 0

B C C 0 B

B
C

Water use: 5 . 0 o n e i : i c watEr supply

D
C B

C
C

6 Irrigated asricuiture

B
B B

7. Orher offs!ream uses

. -

Source:

U.S.

O f f i c e o f Technology Assessment,

1982

-21-

Table 1.2

Surface water quality model evaluation

_Generic type . -_-___ .

Issue ____ _ _ _ ~ _ _ - __ ~ Nonpoint source pollullon and land use Urban %Ooff: Source~'~e.?e:s:ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport to receiving water.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts on beneficial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Control optionsicosts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Erosion and sedirneatation: Source:geieration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transpor; to receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts on beneficial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Control options'costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sal in i:y : Source:genera!ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport t o receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport in receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts o n k n e f i c i a i u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Control optionsicosts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other agricultural runoff: Sourceige2eration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport to receiving ,water.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport in receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts on bene!icial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Control options,costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Airborne pcllutants: Sourceigeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport !o receiving ,water.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts on beneficial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Control optionsicosts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water quallly (other than nonpoint sources and land u s r j Was:e!cad allocation: Sou:ceiEenera:ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport !o recewing w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impac!s an bene!i;ial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Controi optionsicos!s, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thermai pollution. Source!genera:icn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport to receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transpofl in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lrnpacls on beneficla! u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Controi opticn3:ccsts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Toxic materialsS0urce'geie;a:ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport ! o recexing w a ! e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport ~n :ece:vir; wa:er . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lrnfiacts on berie!:ctal use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contrci op!ions,cos:s ....................... Drlnkirg IkaiitySource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trea:menr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impac!s on bene!iciai u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Water quaiity impac!s on aqlJa!ic iife . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~ ~

I No computer, not cornzdex

~

II Com puler, not complex

-..__-___

111 Computer, complex

IV Computer, complex, operational

Overall level of modeling sophistication

4

C A C C

E
A C

E
4

C
C

E
B A

9
A A A A A A C
A A A C

E
A C

C 0

C
C

E
A A C C A

E
6

A A C C A A A A C E A A A C A

C A
A A A C E
A A
A

A
?

A A A C

E
A A

9
A A A C A
1

A A A C

E
C A

C A C C C C C

C C
A A C

C C C

. .

~.~

B
~

3
~

Key' A

Reliabie, credit'e .Tods!ing may ?a 'cadily G;leC for most problems 0 1 : h ~ r3 ~ b t a s t ; e Sorrz modeis ma, Se sdl!ab;e !or :eGula!ioo an.? d e i i ~ n . 0 S a m 8s C, bu! sorne models may be ~ s s ' i r lfor o l a n i i i g am5 ,eia!ed 3 ? - r , x 3 + 3 and suitabis 'or j e : e ' m l r l n g .e!a:;ve e f l s c f r . c Modeling is w%ble Credibility ard 'eliab!lily of W ~ ~ I ! :I i o w due I s weak:es3~3 .n !h4 ja!a : d ~ e S - Mcdeiing 0 1 !*lis :ype . s no! usdally pe+rmeC. O W r a I ! : m 9 ! sf mo.jeii?s mphi)!iia:!on. 0 No modei3 wal'anie 10 Rou!ins >se ~f models 31 ai! !,wd

Source:

U . S . O f f i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y Assessment,

1982

-22-

Table 1.3

Ground-water model evaluation

Sja!ia! cxsldera!ions

Mode' !ypes

Pollti:ai; m o v e m e n t .
~~~~

I !

any

F:o* c o n d i t i o n s
Issues
Ouanti!y--ava!:ablr OLanti!y-cmju7c:ive C)uali!y--scccen!a' prGduC!s , __ Ouali!y-accden!a;

su2plies.
use

.,.

....

se!'oieurrs

. ...

. . .~.., .

road salt . . - - _ _ ~ _ _ _ ~ .

Oualify - a c c i d e n t a l i n d u s t r u a l

Ouality--&gricu!tti:e Oualiry-waste

sal! 5

d:sDgsal land!ill

OLiali!y - seawa
Key e 5 !ne s:x:* :slum' apII!eS t c a s ' ! e - ~ r a l tPELIET ir, u r m L Doliu:a?! movernerl s a ' - . a : e z '#:A ~ 2 7 3 1 z* I - ''a::--e' : np4.a
is

- -_

des;rltrec b*

:-a'sporl

ji.

AppI8ca:ior scale

S l l e - - m M ~ i s 6Plalng wilh areas less Ihar. a f e u square miles Locat-mod4s dealxnc wltb areas greater than a few square miles bu: less ihar. a few thousanc Repionat-modeis deallnp w i t h areas prearer than a !ew th3usand sgbare miles
Abb-eviations.

S~UWE m1ies

W-wiln wlt-without ~a!-sa!u~al(td prouid *aterflow Londlllons unsal-ursaturalea flow conditions. P-Pomur media F-fractured 0 1 solution cavity media Entries: a usabie p:edtcl're :mi :avinC a h ~ .Jep:ee of rellabilily and credlbsliij Gwen sulficle?l dala ~ h E a reliable rs?~:eytual 1001 capabis d 5horl.Ierm ( a l e * )'Ears! pwdlc!lon with a moderale level of c-edibiii:j Giver. su!!vcen! dats a s e t u : CC.' .eDlr;al ImI for hslplnp the hydrolop~sl synthesize compiicalad hydrologic and gunlily dala U a :wdeI !ha? i s still on Ihe researCV slape - nc rrmdei ex,s1s. Blank-model type not applicable IO i s u e area.

Source:

U.S.

O f f i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y Assessment,

1982

2. Plan initiation and preliminary planning

T h i s c h a p t e r i s concerned w i t h plan initiation and p r e l i m i n a r y planning. These constitute the f i r s t s t a g e o f t h e water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g process. During t h i s stage the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f project needs i s f o l l o w e d by p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n , which should t a k e i n t o account t h e dependency o f t h e p r o j e c t on t h e "non-water" s e c t o r s o f t h e economy. I n the course o f the chapter, some problems r e l a t e d t o t h e s t a t e m e n t of project objectives and c o n s t r a i n t s w i l l be reviewed, along w i t h t h e challenges associated w i t h choosing a p p r o p r i a t e personnel that will include representatives of the v a r i o u s agencies p l u s a v a r i e t y o f e x p e r t s from many d i s c i p l i n e s . The importance of i nc 1 ud i ng some mechanisms f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i l l be discussed, a f t e r which t h e conclude w i t h some chapter w i l l comments concerning preliminary s e l e c t i o n of system a n a l y s i s t o o l s t o be u s e d i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s .

t h i s book. T h e r e a r e no g o l d e n rules leading t o the successful identification of needs. The p l a n n i n g team s h o u l d t h i n k h a r d , u s e a1 1 information and evidence a v a i l a b l e , and remember above a l l t h a t g e t t i n g deeper i n t o t h e i s s u e s u n d e r d e b a t e and u n d e r s t a n d i n g them better is likely to lead to r e d e f i n i t i o n of t h e needs a t t h e l a t e r stages o f p r o j e c t planning. One of the greatest difficulties in water resources planning is that often it is initiated i n response to poorly or i 1 I-def ined needs. d e f i ned Utmost e f f o r t s h o u l d b e made t o i d e n t i f y t h e needs c a r e f u l l y , but sometimes one must p r o c e e d e v e n t h o u g h t h e needs have n o t b e e n a s w e l l d e f i n e d as t h e y s h o u l d be. But let's assume that we have s u c c e s s f u l l y i d e n t i f i e d t h e needs. Subsequently, t h e v e r b a l l y d e s c r i b e d needs m u s t b e t r a n s l a t e d into a formulation of the problem. I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f needs and p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n a r e n o t t h e same t h i n g . As p u t b y Quade (1980) : Problem f o r m u l a t i o n i s concerned w i t h s u c h t h i n g s as d e t e r m i n i n g the goals or o b j e c t i v e s t o be achieved by a s o l u t i o n , setting b o u n d a r i e s on w h a t i s t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d , making assumptions about the context, i d e n t i f y i n g t h e t a r g e t g r o u p s , and s e l e c t i n g the initial approach the analysis i s t o take. Translation of needs into a problem formulation is itself a process. I t u n d e r g o e s changes in time w i t h r e s p e c t t o language and precision. Initially, problem f o r m u l a t i o n must be above all compatible w i t h the language and p r e c i s i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h o s e who a r e charged w i t h p l a n initiation

2.1 Problem formulation

P l a n n i n g f o r water resources p r o j e c t s i s i n i t i a t e d i n response t o needs t h a t a l r e a d y e x i s t or a r e anticipated i n t h e more o r less distant future. The n a t u r e o f t h e s e needs may be very different. Sometimes one can i d e n t i f y t h e k e y needs, for example, protection against floods or supplying irrigation water to sustain a g r i c u l t u r a l development. However, i n most c a s e s t h e r e i s a set of mutual l y depend en t and interconnected needs; and t h e i r u n d e r s t a n d i n g and c l e a r a r t i c u l a t i o n No e f f o r t s h o u l d b e are d i f f i c u l t . spared t o a n a l y z e i n the broadest p o s s i b l e terms what i s their real nature. Hence, i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of needs i s a v e r y d i f f i c u l t b u t a t t h e same t i m e v e r y i m p o r t a n t phase o f the p l a n n i n g process discussed in

-24-

responsibilities. But we ma Y encounter a v e r y wide spectrum o f different situations. Prob 1 e m a formulation for the i n i t i a t i o n o f n a t i o n w i d e water resources p l a n w i l l be l e s s s p e c i f i c t h a n , f o r example, problem f o r m u l a t i o n f o r a r e l a t i v e l y w e l l - d e f i n e d r e g i o n a l water supply project. Hence, p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n depends o n t h e n a t u r e and s c o p e o f t h e problem, on t h e p l a n n i n g level, on v a r i o u s c o n s t r a i n t s ( t e c h n i c a l , e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l , e t c . ) t h a t must b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t , and above a l l o n p r o j ec t o b j e c t iv e s

most cases, national averages a r e i n s u f f i c i e n t f o r p l a n n i n g purposes, and t h i s c o n c e r n s b o t h t h e s u p p l y and demand s ides of water At no p l a n n i n g l e v e l management. s h o u l d one look a t t h e problems e x c l u s i v e l y from the perspective o f water. For example, t h e a s s e r t i o n "We have t o increase a g r i c u l t u r a l should not 1 ead p r o d u c t i on" immediately to "We need more irrigated agriculture." The r e a l p r o b l e m may b e a b e t t e r d i s t r i b u t i o n system f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t s o r prevention o f t h e i r spoilage. The p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n depends t o a l a r g e extent on what is a c c e p t e d as t h e r e a l p r o b l e m i n t h e region or subregion i n question. For example, whether sporting fishery i s a p r o b l e m o r n o t depends v e r y much o n t h e g e n e r a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e r e g i o n and t h e a t t i t u d e s o f the local p o p u l a t i o n toward t h i s type of recreational activity. B u i l d i n g a dam may b e c o n s i d e r e d an environmental problem in a more naturea f f 1 uent and-conservation-oriented society, w h i l e such c o n c e r n s w i l l be l e s s c r i t i c a l i n another s i t u a t i o n , such as when a dam c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f b a d l y n'eeded f o o d and fibre. Problem f o r m u l a t i o n i s always subject t o several constraints. P o l i t i ca 1 (adm i n i s t r a t i ve) and h y d r o l o g i c b o u n d a r i e s u s u a l l y do n o t intersect, time andbudget a l l o c a t i o n for problem s o l u t i o n a r e often limited, various regulations s i g n i f i c a n t l y narrow t h e range o f p l a n n i n g o p t i o n s , w a t e r demands a r e o f t e n exogenous t o the planning process, s k i l l e d and p r o f e s s i o n a l personnel a r e u n a v a i l a b l e - these a r e j u s t a few o f the constraints that always impact problem formulation. The appropriate consideration of each o f any such p r o b 1 em constraints b r i ngs formulation closer to becoming v i a b l e and i m p l e m e n t a b l e . Several issues related to

The case of the flood protection project i n the S u l m catchment i n t h e Federal Republic o f Germany (see Case S t u d y 1) provides a good example o f how needs may be translated into a prob 1e m formulation. The needs o f flood protection i n t h i s catchment were known f o r a long time, but they r e a l l y surfaced a f t e r the disastrous Most i m p o r t a n t , t h e f l o o d o f 1970. Audi-NSU w o r k s , w h i c h s u f f e r e d f l o o d damage i n 1970 o f a b o u t 10 m i l l i o n DM, t h r e a t e n e d t o move t o a n o t h e r l o c a t i o n unless its sites were protected against floods s i m i l a r t o t h e one w h i c h o c c u r r e d i n 1970. Consequently, a flood-protection d i s t r i c t was e s t a b l i s h e d w h i c h , in cooperation w i t h the s t a t e water administration, f ormu 1 a t e d the problem, worked o u t a p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n , and s u b m i t t e d t h e p l a n f o r approval t o the s t a t e legislature, which a l l o c a t e d necessary funds and authorized initiation of the p l a n n i n g work. The p l a n n i n g l e v e l s t h a t w e r e 1 (see s e c . described i n Chapter 1.3) d i f f e r i n c h a r a c t e r and scope f r o m one c o u n t r y t o a n o t h e r , b u t a l l of them r e q u i r e t h a t w a t e r p r o b l e m s be formulated i n t h e c o n t e x t o f the and social overall econom i c aspirations o f a given region or nation. Some r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the regional and s u b r e g i o n a l l e v e l s o f concern i s always necessary, with on the its extent depend i ng d i s a g g r e g a t i o n o f t h e problems. In

-25-

problem f o r m u l a t i o n are discussed i n subsequent s e c t i o n s .

2.2

Dependency of plan formulation on "non-water" sectors

of the region enough. Such explicitly p r e l im i nary phase.

was n o t s t a t e d c l e a r l y d i f f i c u l t i e s should be recognized in the project f o r m u l a t io n

After t h e needs have been identified and the problem formulated, one can start the preliminary formulation of the plan. Because a p l a n i s concerned w i t h water, i t should n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be c o n s i d e r e d a ' ' w a t e r " p r o j e c t p e r se. The s o l u t i o n may i n f a c t be o n l y tangentially related to water control and management. I t i s thus very important t h a t a l l possible c o m p e t i n g o r complementary a s p e c t s of the of "non-water" sectors economy b e c o n s i d e r e d b e f o r e t h e p r e l i m i n a r y f o r m u l a t i o n o f a water plan. This pertains to such q u e s t i o n s as hydropower v s . thermal power developments, navigation vs. r a i 1road transportation, and structural flood control measures f 1 oodp 1 a i n vs. nonstructural management. In general this addresses t h e i s s u e o f s u b s t i t u t i o n and t r a d e - o f f s . The i n t e r f a c e and i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f w a t e r and r e l a t e d land resources w i t h other sectors of t h e economy s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d in preliminary project formulation.

2.3

Statement of objectives

project

To what e x t e n t w a t e r resources management i t s e l f c a n b e t r e a t e d as an i n d i v i d u a l s e c t o r o f t h e n a t i o n a l economy i s a n o t h e r q u e s t i o n w h i c h has no clear answer. Even i n c e n t r a l l y p l a n n e d economies, water management sometimes does n o t have a sector s t a t u s - w a t e r management responsibi 1 i t i e s are d,istributed among s e v e r a l m i n i s t r i e s , such as those f o r a g r i c u l t u r e , energy, and pub1 i c w o r k s .
Water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r s must o f t e n base t h e i r p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n on imperfect information concerning other s e c t o r s o f t h e economy. For example, w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r s i n I s r a e l f o r m u l a t i n g t h e E a s t e r n Negev P r o j e c t (see Case Study 2) stress that the development p l a n and schedule f o r industrial activities were u n c e r t a i n , t h e f u t u r e c r o p p i n g p a t t e r n s were d u b i o u s , and the o v e r a l l pace o f p h y s i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t

One o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t p a r t s of preliminary plan formulation i s a clear statement of project o b j e c t iv e s I t should be remembered, however, that i n most practical situations, objectives cannot be t a k e n as g i v e n . As p o i n t e d o u t b y H i t c h (1961), it is impossible to define usua 1 1 y appropriate objectives without knowing a g r e a t d e a l about the f e a s i b i 1 i t y and c o s t o f a c h i e v i n g them. And t h i s k n o w l e d g e m u s t b e derived from t h e a n a l y s i s . The greatest d i f f i c u l t y i n s t a r t i n g w i t h given objectives i s the f a c t that most o f t e n t h e y a r e m u l t i p l e and conflicting, and t h a t a l t e r n a t i v e means of satisfying any one objective a r e l i k e l y t o produce substantial adverse effects on another. N o t h i ng but r igorous quantitative analysis can tell w h e t h e r a p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e makes sense o r n o t - whether it is feasible, how much i t w i l l cost. Such a n a l y s i s and u l t i m a t e c h o i c e o f socially relevant project objectives r e q u i r e s judgment b o t h on t h e p a r t of t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r , and on t h e p a r t o f o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the p l a n n i n g process, e.g., the politicians. This i s s t r e s s e d by M a j o r (1977), who u n d e r 1 i n e s that "much o f t h e c o n f u s i o n and d e b a t e about water resources p r o j e c t s t h a t have b e e n p r o p o s e d i n the recent years has arisen because the p l a n n e r s were n o t d e v e l o p i n g d e s i g n options responsive t o the o b j e c t i v e s of the political process.'' The p e r c e p t i o n o f p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s by the public at l a r g e and o t h e r constituencies i s equally important.

The g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s are stated d i f f e r e n t l y a t the various planning levels. The ones a t the - f o r many good national level reasons t h a t a r e n o t about t o change - t e n d t o b e g l o b a l (e.g., to

-26-

enhance n a t i ona 1 econom i c development, to enhance social w e l l - b e i n g , t o enhance q u a l i t y , and to enhance regional economic development). Moreover, t h e y do n o t d e t a i l the c o n f l i c t i n g issues. They are i n t e n t i o n a l l y as encompassing and as c o m p r e h e n s i v e as p o s s i b l e t o e n s u r e b r o a d s u p p o r t by t h e v a r i o u s c o n s t i t u e n c i e s and s t a k e h o l d e r s . In t h i s respect, one s h o u l d k e e p in mind the "horse-trading" process t h a t i s so d o m i n a n t when i t comes t o the water resources planning process. The a r t o f n e g o t i a t i o n and compromise i s an integral part of t h a t p r o c e s s , and f o r negotiations t o succeed, t h e p a r t i e s must s t a r t w i t h a n a c c e p t a b l e agenda o f p r o j e c t objectives t h a t can be modified during the negotiations. Having r e a c h e d agreement a b o u t t h e g e n e r a l project objectives, more f o c u s c a n b e c e n t e r e d on s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s and t h e i r translation i n t o design criteria. These c r i t e r i a r e q u i r e d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e measures t h a t w i l l b e used t o assess t o what d e g r e e i n d i v i d u a l o b j e c t i v e s have been m e t . The s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s u s u a l l y c o i n c i d e w i t h one water management p u r p o s e o r s e v e r a l , s u c h as w a t e r s u p p l y , p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t floods, development o f n a v i g a t i o n , hydro-power production. The c a s e s t u d i e s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e Appendix o f t h i s book p r o v i d e a n i l l u s t r a t i o n o f how d i f f e r e n t l y s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s may b e s t a t e d . The o n l y e x p l i c i t objective of the Eastern Negev P r o j e c t i n I s r a e l ( s e e Case S t u d y 2 ) was s a t i s f a c t i o n of the i n c r e a s i n g w a t e r demands a t t h e least overall cost. The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e Maumee (see R i v e r Basin Study i n t h e U . S . Case S t u d y 4) were t o p r o t e c t l a n d resources, t o r e d u c e e r o s i o n and sedimentation, to improve water quality, to protect fish and w i Id1i f e habitats, to enhance outdoor r e c r e a t i o n opportunities, t o r e d u c e f l o o d damages, and t o meet water s u p p l y needs. The o b j e c t i v e s of the Vistula River Project in P o l a n d (see Case S t u d y 6) were t o a water resources formulate development (investment) program c a p a b l e o f m e e t i n g w a t e r management tasks ( p r i m a r i l y water supply, f l o o d c o n t r o l , and w a t e r q u a l i t y c o n t r o l )

were p r o j e c t e d t o t h e y e a r s and 2000 (15 and 30 y e a r s t i m e respectively). The h o r i zon, objective of t h e A d e l a i d e Water Resources S t u d y i n Australia (see 5) was to make Case Study recommendations f o r a program o f and for works c o n s t r u c t i on particular operating policies, in order t o p r o v i d e a water supply for m e t r o p o l i t a n Adelaide over the n e x t 30 y e a r s .

that

1985

of Even t h e s e few examples project o b j ec t i ves show that, d e p e n d i n g o n t h e c h a r a c t e r and t h e scope o f t h e p r o j e c t , o b j e c t i v e s c a n be s t a t e d i n v e r y d i f f e r e n t ways.

2.4

Project constraints

The evaluation of project objectives leads t o a l t e r n a t i v e s , whi l e constraints restrict alternatives and reduce their number. However, from an e v a l u a t i o n p o i n t o f view, constraints often have a function similar to objectives. As p o i n t e d o u t by Simon ( 1 964) : I t i s d o u b t f u l whether d e c i s i o n s a r e g e n e r a l l y d i r e c t e d towards a goal. I t i s e a s i e r and c l e a r e r to view d e c i s i o n s as b e i n g concerned with discovering courses o f a c t i o n t h a t s a t i s f y a whole s e t of c o n s t r a i n t s . I t is t h i s s e t , and n o t any one o f i t s members, t h a t i s m o s t a c c u r a t e l y v i e w e d as t h e g o a l of the action... Whether we t r e a t a l l t h e c o n s t r a i n t s s y m m e t r i c a l l y or r e f e r t o some a s y m m e t r i c a l l y as goals, i s l a r g e l y a matter o f linguistic or analytic convenience.

'

When a distinction between objectives (goals) and c o n s t r a i n t s i s made, i t i s u s u a l l y based o n t h e misconception of accepting the constraint as an absol U t e restriction. C o n s t r a i n t s must n o t b e t r e a t e d as s a c r e d l y i n v i o l a b l e . They must be s c r u t i n i z e d f r o m many points o f v i e w as the analysis p r o c e e d s and t e c h n i c a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s emerge, and t h e i r r o l e s should be s u b j e c t t o change.

-27-

Constraints genera 1 1 y considered in water resources planning vary widely. They may b e of technical and economic n a t u r e , but also important and often overlooked or underestimated are i n s t i t u t i onal and cultural c o n s t r a i n t s which r u l e o u t c e r t a i n project alternatives. I n general, a l l c o n s t r a i n t s s h o u l d be e x p l i c i t l y s p e c i f i e d and open t o d e b a t e i n t h e plan initiation phase t o a v o i d c o n t r o v e r s i e s t h a t may s u r f a c e a t later stages o f p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g o r implementation. The c a s e s t u d i e s i n t h i s book s p e c i f y a wide spectrum o f d i f f e r e n t constraints. Time, f u n d i ng, technical , and technological c o n s t r a i n t s a r e most common, b u t l e g a l c o n s t r a i n t s a r e a l s o mentioned quite often. F o r example, the n a t i o n a l laws i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a t the time o f t h e Maumee S t u d y placed important water qual i t y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n t h e hands o f t h e As a consequence, the states. s t a t e s were n o t p r e p a r e d t o d r a f t a w a t e r q u a l i t y management p l a n f o r an e n t i r e basin. Quite often the planners are also constrained by the requirement of using only existing d a t a , i r r e s p e c t i v e o f how a d e q u a t e t h e d a t a base i s f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f a p l a n (see Case Study 3 ) . Lack of adequate data, existing structures, and plans o f other agencies a r e a l s o quite common constraints. Some constraints are permanent and c a n n e v e r be v i o l a t e d , while others are binding i n the s h o r t r u n and may b e changed by t h e passage of t i m e o r removed by invent ion or technological i m p r o v e m e n t . Thus, some c o n s t r a i n t s others l e s s so. But are f i r m , irrespective of the nature o f a particular constraint, i t i s the professional r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the systems a n a l y s t t o point out the influence of i t s marginal c o s t on the p r o j e c t outcomes. If the systems analyst is told that s o m e t h i n g he b e l i e v e s t o be r e l e v a n t s h o u l d n o t o r c a n n o t be c o n s i d e r e d , he must clarify to the decision-makers what the consequences m i g h t b e .

2.5

Agencies involved

and

personnel

The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l structure t h e p l a n n e r s a r e f a c e d w i t h when initiating a water resources planning e f f o r t i s more o f t e n t h a n not a "geological" accumulation o f past organizational compromises W i ener ( 1972) Somet i mes the existing structure fits the o b j e c t i v e s of t h e p r o j e c t ; sometimes it must be b y p a s s e d and a new p l a n n i n g e n t i t y be c r e a t e d . No h a r d and f a s t r u l e determines what is b e s t f o r e a c h s p e c i f i c case.

I f a national agency charged w i t h water planning i s already i n e x i s t e n c e and t h e p r o j e c t i s n o t o f a very l o c a l s c a l e , t h i s agency i s t h e one w h i c h u s u a l l y t a k e s t h e l e a d and p r e p a r e s t h e p l a n . T h i s was t h e case o f the V i s t u l a Project in P o l a n d ( s e e Case S t u d y 6 ) . w h e r e t h e consulting f i r m operating w i t h i n the framework of t h e N a t i o n a l Water was charged with Author i t y p r e p a r a t i o n of a p l a n i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h a b o u t 40 r e s e a r c h i n s t i t u t i o n s representing a1 1 ministries of concerned. The d e v e 1 opmen t p l a n n i n g m e t h o d o l o g y was a s s i g n e d t o a s p e c i a l l y f o r m e d r e s e a r c h team o f a b o u t 20 s p e c i a l i s t s who c o o p e r a t e d c l o s e l y w i t h an i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a n e l of United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) e x p e r t s t h r o u g h o u t the e n t i r e duration of the p r o j e c t . UNDP e x p e r t s a s s i s t e d a l s o i n t h e preparation of the Upper Mures Project i n Romania (see Case S t u d y 91, w h i c h was a s s i g n e d t o a n a t i o n a l w a t e r r e s e a r c h and d e s i g n institute ( p a r t o f t h e Romanian N a t i o n a l Water Authority) reporting d i r e c t l y t o the Permanent E x e c u t i v e Body o f the Upper Mures P r o j e c t . The E a s t e r n Negev P r o j e c t in I s r a e l ( s e e Case Study 2) was prepared by the n a t i ona 1 water planning organization, although the p r o j e c t was r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l and t w o w a t e r r e s o u r c e s e n g i n e e r s , one p r o g r a m m e r , and one s t u d e n t w e r e s u f f i c i e n t to t a k e c a r e o f t h e system d e s i g n . Somewhat d i f f e r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n may be encountered in other countries. For implementation o f t h e S t u d y o f D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y

-28-

i n t h e p r o v i n c e o f South H o l l a n d in t h e N e t h e r l a n d s (see Case S t u d y 3 ) , distinction was made between governmental p l a n n i n g and t e c h n i c a l planning. The f i r s t one has been with by the Steering dea 1 t C o m m i t t e e , whose members w e r e t o p administrators of central and provincial governments. The t e c h n i c a l p l a n n i n g h a s been c a r r i e d o u t by several research i n s t i t u t i o n s under supervision of the National I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y . Almost all the people c a r r y i n g out the s t u d y h a v e academic d e g r e e s . The disciplines represented vary from mathematics and engineering to biology, and t h e g r o u p included experts on the recreational behaviour o f the local population.

organizations - a research i n s t i t u t e (university), an institute for a p p l i e d r e s e a r c h (commercial b a s i s , and a private, nonprof i t ) , government-supported agency (nonprofit)

P l a n n i n g a system o f flood p r o t e c t i o n r e s e r v o i r s f o r t h e Sulm Catchment i n t h e FRG ( s e e Case S t u d y 1) was c a r r i e d o u t b y t h e local A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Bureau, S t a t e Water which m a i n t a i n s a s t a f f capable o f a1 1 technical and hand 1 i ng administratve tasks. The Bureau was a smal 1 team of a s s i s t e d by u n i v e r s i t y research people. The great v a r ie t y of organizational involvement is evident, and t h e examples cited above a r e j u s t some o f t h e many p o s s i b l e arrangements. Most o f the agencies were assisted i n the planning process by external experts, mostly from u n i v e r s i t i e s . This is understandable, s i nce government agencies in many c o u n t r i e s have developed a s p e c i f i c m i s s i o n or missions over t h e years. To ensure the generation o f a s u f f i c i e n t l y c o m p r e h e n s i v e p l a n and t o provide f o r evaluation o f several project options, a m i x o f agencies i s p r e f e r a b l e , u s u a l l y w i t h one o f them e n t r u s t e d w i t h t h e l e a d e r s h i p and c o o r d i n a t i o n r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .

For t h e Maumee R i v e r Basin S t u d y i n t h e USA (see Case S t u d y 41, t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission formed a planning board, with members f r o m t h r e e s t a t e s and f o u r federal government a g e n c i e s . In a d d i t i o n t o the r e l a t i v e l y h i g h l y s k i l l e d personnel i n t h e s t a t e and f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s , t h e Commission was a s s i s t e d by a small research team from a u n i v e r s i t y .
only agency directly in the Metropolitan A d e l a i d e Water Resources Study in A u s t r a l i a (see Case S t u d y 5 ) was t h e and Water Supply Eng i n e e r i n g Department of South Australia, r e s p o n s i b l e a t the time o f t h e study t o t h e M i n i s t e r o f Works o f the Government o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a . The development interacted with the R i v e r M u r r a y Commission, a body o n w h i c h t h e government o f all the s t a t e s o f South A u s t r a l i a involved i n t h e s t u d y w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d as w e l l as t h e F e d e r a l Government o f Australia. The s k i l l e d p e r s o n n e l involved i n the planning process were eng i n e e r s and an engineer-economist of the above-mentioned Department. The

i nvo 1v e d

2.6

Selection and utilization of experts

The Susa R e s e a r c h Program in Denmark ( s e e Case S t u d y 7) was l e d by the Danish Commi t t e e for Hydrology. The subproject c o n c e r n i ng management of water r e s o u r c e s was c a r r i e d o u t b y t h r e e

I n the plan i n i t i a t i o n and preliminary planning phase, it becomes n e c e s s a r y a l s o t o e n s u r e t h a t c o n t r b u t i o n s a r e made b y many d if f erent experts. The m u l t i d i s c i p i n a r y n a t u r e o f water resources p anning n e c e s s i t a t e s t h a t i n t e r d i s c i p i n a r y i n t e r a c t i o n should t a k e p l a c e among them. Usually the r e s u l t s a r e more m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y t h a n i n t e r d s c i p l i n a r y , meaning t h a t although t..ere is interaction, i t t e n d s t o t a k e t h e shape of a presentation of r e s u l t s by t h e i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r t s as seen i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e i r own e x p e r t i s e .
tnmn

nf

thn

mnet

i m n n r t a n t

prerequisites

f o r t h e success o f an

i n t e r d i s c i p i n a r y study are (1) d e v e l o p i n g mutual t r u s t among t h e e x p e r t s and ( 2 ) h e l p i n g each e x p e r t t o r e a l i z e t h a t w i t h i n h i s o r her own d i s c i p i n e he or she can contribute t o the overall study effort. Thus each recognizes that his or her c o n t r i b u t i o n i s being 1 istened to as worthwhile. Additional conditions for project success i nc 1 u d e the mutual a d e v e l o p m e n t among e x p e r t s of spirit of cooperation and t h e a b i l i t y t o overcome a n a t u r a l bias so t h a t among the disciplines d i f f e r e n t or opposing p o i n t s of view, approaches, and b e l i e f s w i l l be t o l e r a t e d . The t i m e needed f o r these conditions t o d e v e l o p and m a t u r e and t h e f a c t t h a t a l m o s t e v e r y e x p e r t j o i n s t h e team w i t h h i s o r h e r own p r e c o n c e i v e d n o t i o n o f what c o n s t i t u t e s a p l a n n i n g s t u d y may explain why, during the p r e l i m i n a r y phase, much t i m e may be spent i n p h i l o s o p h i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s t h a t o f t e n seem t r i v i a l and e n d l e s s . I t i s h e r e t h a t w e l l - d e v e l o p e d and acceptable guidelines for regional or river-basin p l a n n i n g w o u l d have t h e most i m p a c t o n s t r e a m l i n i n g such c o s t l y , time-consuming debates. U s u a l l y t h e r e a r e two major groups o f e x p e r t s involved i n the plan initiation and p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g phase. First, there are experts who are capable of f o r m u l a t i n g t h e system concepts. They m u s t i n t e r a c t w i t h o t h e r g r o u p s who h a v e e x p e r t i s e i n w a t e r s u p p l y , i n d u s t r i a l water use, irrigation, hydro-power production, forestry, and t h e l i k e . I t i s of utmost i m p o r t a n c e t h a t t h e systems a n a l y s t s and disciplinary experts fully u n d e r s t a n d t h e p r o j e c t p u r p o s e s and is especially objectives. This important when the d i s c i p l i n a r y experts identify constraints that r e d u c e t h e m o d e l i n g freedom o f the systems a n a l y s t s . I t i s important a l s o t o c o n s u l t e x p e r t s who a r e n o t project-specific, such as l a w y e r s , b i o l o g i s t s who investigate rare species, archeologists, landscape architects, etc. The b u s i n e s s o f whom t o s e l e c t i s i n p a r t d e t e r m i n e d by t h e l o c a l l y

a v a i l a b l e e x p e r t i s e and t h e scope o f the project. Experts should b e c a r e f u l l y s e l e c t e d , and i n q u i r i e s t o their f ormer c u s t omer s and evaluation of their p r e v i o u s work may b e v e r y u s e f u l and a d v i s a b l e . The m o s t important expert t o be selected i s the p r o j e c t leader. He must n o t o n l y be an e x p e r t i n w a t e r resources p l a n n i n g , h e must a l s o b e a leader. His talents and are of c r u c ia 1 persona 1 i t y impor t a n c e to the successf u1 compl e t i o n of the planning act i v i ties.

2.7 Public participation

For the purpose of this s e c t i o n , t h e word p u b l i c r e f e r s t o an i n d i v i d u a l o r a g r o u p n o t h a v i n g the governmental decision-making authority. Public participation such r e f e r s t o the a c t i v i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l s o r groups i n t r y i n g t o influence decision-making. Public p a r t i c i p a t i o n should not be a one-way street. I t should not o n l y b e a way o f ascertaining d i f f e r e n t views, but i t should also provide those whose interests may be a f f e c t e d an o p p o r t u n i t y t o learn a b o u t t h e d e c i s i o n s b e i n g made. I t i s i m p o r t a n t , however, t o f i n d a way to insure that e x p r e s s i o n and consideration of public viewpoints do not improperly impede the decision-making process. According t o U.S. sources ( N a t i o n a l Water Commission 1973), d e t e r m i n i n g t h e role that public participation should p l a y in water resources planning requires discovering (a) the l i m i t a t i o n s inherent i n public p a r t i c i p a t i o n , (b) t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s t h a t m u s t b e met t o e n s u r e a d e q u a t e participation, and (c) how that p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be s t r u c t u r e d . In several countries, water r e s o u r c e s management and p l a n n i n g i s specialized the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of agencies which represent the i n t e r e s t s o f a l l w a t e r u s e r s and t h e public a t large. The p u b l i c is, therefore, represented in the p l a n n i n g process by v i r t u e o f the fact that representatives of several constituencies serve on p r a c t i c a l l y a1 1 governmental and 1 oca 1

-30-

administration agencies. Such agencies, of course, must listen carefully to the c o n c e r n s and opinions voiced by the d i f f e r e n t i n t e r e s t groups t h a t p r o v i d e t h i s input i n t o t h e p l a n n i n g process. Concerning the public a t large, it e f f o r t s s h o u l d b e made t o keep informed about t h e progress o f t h e p r o j e c t b y p r e s e n t i n g i n t h e mass media ( o r even a t s p e c i a l m e e t i n g s , such as a r e h e l d i n t h e N e t h e r l a n d s ) summaries o f t h e "work t o date." Project results s h o u l d a l s o be d i s s e m i n a t e d f o r p u b l i c s c r u t i n y and comment t h r o u g h t h e v a r i o u s a g e n c i e s involved i n the study. I n some c a s e s , however, s p e c i a l g r o u p s a r e formed, such as the C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y Committee f o r t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y i n t h e USA (see Case S t u d y 4 ) , w h i c h was a formal e n t i t y w i t h an a p p o i n t e d membership. These a p p o i n t m e n t s w e r e made t h r o u g h v a r i o u s c i v i c g r o u p s , s u c h as t h e League o f Women V o t e r s , t h e S i e r r a Club, e t c . W i t h such a s t r o n g b a c k i n g from a b r o a d c i v i c constituency, a formal mandate t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p l a n n i n g process, and a b u d g e t a l l o c a t e d f r o m t h e project planning funds, the Committee was v o c a l and i n f l u e n t i a l . There are other ways equally effective, e.g., the citizens' p a r t i c i p a t i o n done i n t h e F R G . Although t h e forms o f public p a r t i c i p a t i o n may b e more o r l e s s formalized i n d i f f e r e n t countries, it i s important, e s p e c i a l l y i n the it p l a n i n i t i a t i o n phase, t o expand as much as is practical and reasonable. I t should be recognized t h a t t h e r e a r e no f i r m a p r i o r i grounds for believing that the engineers o f a water authority or representatives of any other g o v e r n m e n t a l agency know f u l l y w h a t t h e pub1 i c w a n t s and w h a t i s " b e s t " f o r the public.

the planners are acquainted w i t h . According to Miser (1982), six p r i n c i p l e s of t h a t c h o i c e may b e enunciated. Analytic tools should be chosen t h a t a r e 1 . a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e p r o b l e m and t o the prospective solutions t h a t may emerge. 2. matched a p p r o p r i a t e l y t o t h e available data, since an a t t r a c t i v e method t h a t c a l l s for n o n e x i s t e n t data cannot yield trustworthy results.

3. i n t e r n a l l y

consistent (the s o p h i s t i c a t e d a n a l y s i s o f one p a r t s h o u l d n o t b e bludgeoned in by hazy specu 1 a t i o n another).

4. b a l a n c e d i n d e t a i l and a c c u r a c y
(if one enters with order-of-magnitude estimates, one i s seldom e n t i t l e d t o f i v e figure accuracy in the resul ts, or, if accurate e s t i m a t e s a r e combined with very questionable estimates, t h i s f a c t s h o u l d be r e f l e c t e d in how the results are presented).

5.

appropriately interdisciplinary i n t h e l i g h t o f an a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e problem w i t h which t h e work began and is being continued.

6. appropriate,

if at a1 1 possible, t o t h e process o f p r e s e n t i ng t h e f i nd i ngs t h a t w i l l emerge a t t h e end o f the p l a n n i n g study ( t h e c l i e n t w i l l surely n o t want t o poke i n t o d e t a i l s , b u t some u n d e r s t a n d i n g tool s has of t h e ana 1 y t i c p e r s u a s i v e v a l u e f o r many u s e r s o f systems a n a l y s i s r e s u l t s ) .

2.8

Preliminary selection of systems analysis tools

Additional advice i s offered by R a i f f a (1982) c o n c e r n i n g t h e u s e o f models in systems a n a l y s i s and planning e f f o r t s : I n modeling r e a l i t y f o r p o l i c y guidance t h e r e a r e a host o f options t o consider. F i r s t of a1 1 some a d v i c e : Beware o f

The p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s s h o u l d be d r i v e n b y t h e g o a l s , o b j e c t i v e s , and issues of concern and n o t by s p e c i f i c p l a n n i n g methodologies t h a t

-31-

g e n e r a l purpose g r a n d i o s e models that try to incorporate p r a c t i c a l l y everything. Such are difficult to mode 1 s Val i d a t e , to interpret, to cal ibrate statistically, to m a n i p u l a t e , and m o s t i m p o r t a n t l y t o explain. You may be b e t t e r off n o t w i t h o n e b i g model b u t with a set of simpler models, off with simple starting deterministic ones and c o m p l i c a t i n g t h e model i n s t a g e s as s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s shows t h e need f o r s u c h c o m p l i c a t i o n s . A model does n o t have t o a d d r e s s a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e problem. I t s h o u l d be d e s i g n e d t o a i d i n understanding the dynami c interactions of some p h a s e o f your problem. O t h e r models c a n a d d r e s s o t h e r phases. Although s e l e c t i o n o f methods and systems a n a l y s i s t o o l s t o b e employed f o r p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g s h o u l d n o t b e done t o o e a r l y , the plan i n i t i a t i o n and p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g phase should involve some p r e l i m i n a r y work c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r choice. The e x t e n t o f t h i s work depends o n t h e c h a r a c t e r and t h e scope o f t h e p r o j e c t and o n s e v e r a l o t h e r f a c t o r s , b u t most o f t e n t h e r e are i n i t i a l l y a few (i.e., not too many) i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e f a m i l i a r not only with the subject matter o f the p r o j e c t i n question b u t also w i t h systems a n a l y s i s and i t s t o o l s . They s h o u l d e x a m i n e what a n a l y t i c methods r e l a t e d t o t h e p r o j e c t a r e ( i n c l ud i ng a v a i 1 ab1 e read i 1y e x a m i n a t i o n o f computer h a r d w a r e and software), what a d a p t i o n s and new m e t h o d o l o g i c a l developments m i g h t be necessary, and w h a t manpower and computa t i ona 1 and f i nanc i a1 r e s o u r c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o do t h e job. The d a t a a v a i l a b l e and t i m e c o n s t r a i n t s are important f a c t o r s i n such a n a n a l y s i s . Final selection t o o l s and methods t o be used i n d a t a and man i pu 1 a t i o n , p r o c e s s i ng, interpretation i s almost always a compromise between w h a t one w a n t s t o d o and w h a t one c a n do under given circumstances. Frequently it is usef u1 to make some back-of-the-envelope calculations based o n s i m p l i f i e d a s s u m p t i o n s j u s t

t o g e t an i d e a o f what can be expected i f more e l a b o r a t e methods a r e t o be u s e d .

al 1 case studies Almost examined i n t h i s book i n d i c a t e t h a t the selection of systems a n a l y s i s tools and development of the will be methodological approach accompanied by some disputes, e s p e c i a l l y i f a p p l i c a t i o n o f some o f the more advanced methods is considered (e.g., the surrogate worth trade-off method a p p l i e d i n t h e Maumee R i v e r Basin Study). However, even in case of considerable disagreement on t h e methodology to be used, such d i s p u t e s c a n have a p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on t h e u l t i m a t e outcome o f the anal ys i s.
What a r e t h e m a j o r q u e s t i o n s t o be a d d r e s s e d i n t h e preliminary s e l e c t i o n o f systems a n a l y s i s t o o l s ? One o f t h e most c r i t i c a l q u e s t i o n s is how to handle project u n c e r t a i n t i e s due t o t h e s h o r t and long-term variability of water resources (primarily precipitation and s t r e a m f low) But the u n c e r t a i n t y issue i s not l i m i t e d t o h y d r o l o g i c processes: it relates a l s o t o p r o j e c t objectives, water demand p r o j e c t i o n s , and severa 1 other factors embedded in the socioeconomic c o n t e x t o f a given project. Another typical question is whether alternative project s o l u t i o n s s h o u l d b e examined and compared by simulation, or the "best" s o l u t i on be directly i d e n t i f i e d b y a p p l i c a t i o n o f one o f the optimization techniques. In case o f more complex planning efforts, simulation i s usually a more p r e f e r a b l e a p p r o a c h ; h o w e v e r , quite often simulation i s coupled with some kind of sca 1a r (s ingl e-obj e c t ive) or vector o p t i m i z a t ion, (mu1 t i p l e - o b j e c t i v e ) e.g., f o r o p t i m i z a t i o n of w a t e r resources allocation at each s i m u l a t i o n step.

The p r o b l e m o f the systems analyst is to find that particular tool or set of tools that w i l l correspond best t o the project needs.

2.9

References
Quade, E . S. 1980. Pitfalls in f o r m u l a t i o n and m o d e l i n g . In P i t f a l l s o f A n a l y s i s , e d i t e d by G. M a j o n e and E . S. Quade. W i l e y , New Y o r k .

H i t c h , C.J. 1981. On t h e c h o i c e of objectives in systems studies. I n Systems: Research and D e s i g n . Proceedings o f the F i r s t Systems Symposium a t Case I n s t i t u t e o f Technology, e d i t e d Eckmann: Wiley, New b y D.P. York.

1977. M u l t i o b j e c t i v e s Major, D.C. Water R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g , Water R e s o u r c e s Monograph No. 4. American Geophysical Union, W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.
Miser, H.J., and E.S. Quade, (eds.) 1984. Handbook o f Analysis. S y s t ems N o r t h - H o l l a n d , New York

1982. P o l i c y A n a l y s i s . R a i f f a , H. A Checklist of Concerns, pp. 82-2, International Institute for A p p l i e d Systems A n a l y s i s , Laxenburg, A u s t r i a .
1964. On t h e c o n c e p t o f Simon, H. organization goal. Administrative Sc i ence Quarterly g(1).
Wiener, A. 1972. The R o l e o f .. Water in Development. M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

1973. N a t i o n a l Water Commission. Water P o l i c i e s f o r the Future. Final Report t o the President and t o . t h e Congress of the U n i t e d S t a t e s by t h e N a t i o n a l Water Cornmission, Washington, D.C.

3. Data collection and processing

Chapter 3 i s concerned w i t h data collection and processing, the w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e Stage 2 o f p l a n n i n g process. I n t h i s stage the d a t a needed f o r t h e p r o j e c t s h o u l d be c o l l e c t e d and t h e i r q u a l i t y and quantity evaluated, and d e c i s i o n s s h o u l d b e made o n t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f additional data concerning the h y d r o l o g i c regime o f the water bodies, w a t e r q u a l i t y , w a t e r use, and a l t e r n a t i v e ways o f project i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n d i t s o p e r a t i o n as w e l l as d e m o g r a p h i c a l , economical, and e c o l o g i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n . The d a t a c o l l e c t i o n process r e q u i r e s l i s t i n g o f sources o f d a t a , exploration of these sources, i n q u i r i e s about o t h e r p o s s i b l e d a t a sources, e v a l u a t i o n o f data q u a l i t y , and t a b u l a t i o n o f d a t a f o r t h e i r final processing. This process i n v o l v e s many e x p e r t s , because t h e data collected must be purpose-oriented. The p u r p o s e must govern t h e type, t h e accuracy, and t h e time h o r i z o n o f the data. For example, d a t a needs f o r n a t i o n a l o r regional l o n g - t e r m water r e s o u r c e s planning are discussed in the handbook for national evaluation of water resources assessment a c t i v i t i e s (Unesco/WMO 198 1)

additional data. F i r s t , we c o l l e c t w h a t e v e r i s a l r e a d y a v a i l a b l e and pertinent to the project goals without initiating any specific f i e l d measurement p r o g r a m s . Second, i t may b e f o u n d t h a t t h e a v a i l a b l e data are very l i m i t e d and f u r t h e r planning requires that additional observations and measurements b e made. i n t h i s case t h e p r o b a b l e opportunity loss o f delaying the p r o j e c t u n t i l enough a d d i t i o n a l d a t a are c o l l e c t e d must be c a r e f u l l y evaluated, t a k i n g i n t o account what risks of p r o j e c t inadequacy c a n b e accepted. Finally, the third possible situation i s a mix o f t h e two o t h e r : the a v a i l a b l e d a t a base i s s u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h some a d d i t i o n a l information collected in the f i e l d highly b y means o f ad hoc and s e l e c t i v e measurement p r o g r a m s o f s h o r t d u r a t i on.

3.1 Specification of data needs

When t h e p l a n i n i t i a t i o n and preliminary planning result in a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o proceed f u r t h e r , the planning e f f o r t enters the data c o l l e c t i o n and p r o c e s s i n g phase. Always some data are already available from the preliminary p l a n n i n g a n a l y s e s , b u t i n m o s t cases they a r e i n s u f f i c i e n t f o r g e n e r a t i o n of project alternatives and t h e i r A t t h i s p o i n t a more evaluation. complete data base is needed ( c o n c e r n i n g h y d r o l o g i c d a t a see, f o r example, Andrejanov 1975) In principle, there are three possible s i t u a t i o n s concerning c o l l e c t i o n of

To w h a t extent an actual s i t u a t i o n c o r r e s p o n d s t o one o f t h e t h r e e p o s s i b i l i t i e s m e n t i o n e d above depends v e r y much o n t h e a g r e e m e n t of the experts i n v o 1v e d in preparation of a plan. As p o i n t e d o u t i n Chapter 2, expert opinions c o n c e r n i n g d a t a needs may v a r y q u i t e widely. E x p e r t s w i t h know-how i n t h e t e c h n i c a l d i s c i p l i n e s may p r e s s f o r much more d e t a i l e d d a t a t h a n i s required by the p r o j e c t goals, which a r e u n d e r s t o o d b e t t e r by t h e systems analysts. On the other hand, systems a n a l y s t s m u s t remember t h a t t h e i r methods can h a r d l y be u s e d t o prescribe a p p r o p r i a t e courses of a c t i o n i f t h e y a r e n o t based on a n a d e q u a t e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e way t h e system w o r k s . Data availability places r e s t r i c t i o n s on the a n a l y t i c methods t h a t c a n b e u s e d in a specific situation. Hence, t h e d a t a and t h e i r a c c u r a c y m u s t be s u b j e c t t o open d i s c u s s i o n b y a l l c o n c e r n e d . I n i t i a l l y , these d i s c u s s i o n s should be kept at a strategic level, above a1 1 that remember i n g

-34-

evaluation of d a t a needs is a process i n i t s e l f , and s e v e r a l of the questions concerning data adequacy c a n n o t be answered p r i o r t o c r i t i c a l a p p r a i s a l of t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e f i r s t model r u n s . The a d v a n t a g e s o f m a t h e m a t i c a l i n many models are recognized c o u n t r i e s a l l over t h e w o r l d . The models, however, cannot be f u l l y effective without adequate d a t a t o s u p p o r t them (model development, calibration, validation, and ultimate application). T h i s i s why t h e d a t a - g a t h e r i n g p r o c e s s s h o u l d be r e l a t e d more d i r e c t l y t o t h e needs of models. Subsequent t o the acceptance o f t h e p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s and m e t h o d o l o g y by a l l e x p e r t s on the planning team, the data c o n t r i b u t o r s must u n d e r s t a n d and a c c e p t t h a t t h e systems a n a l y s t ( t h e model builder) sets the data requirements.

I t is worth noting that adequacy o f d a t a i s a l s o a f u n c t i o n o f t h e methods used f o r p l a n n i n g and decision-making. I f a project i s planned to accommodate future adaptations t o revised objectives and new i n f o r m a t i o n , l a r g e r e r r o r s i n the estimates o f key p r o j e c t p a r a m e t e r s may be t o l e r a t e d . I f no such accommodations a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e p l a n - a common a p p r o a c h b y t h o s e who l i k e t o s o l v e problems once and f o r all - much s m a l l e r e r r o r s s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t h a n i n t h e case o f f l e x i b l e , a d a p t i v e p l a n n i n g ( Y e v j e v i c h 1973). When t h e g e n e r a l circumstances a r e such t h a t a p l a n i s needed, i t i s the r o l e o f the water resources planner t o develop the best plan possible f o r the a v a i l a b l e data. I t i s t r u e t h a t many p l a n s f o r w a t e r resources p r o j e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n developing countries, a r e proposed a t t i m e s when t h e h y d r o l o g i c and n o n h y d r o l o g i c d a t a base is far smaller t h a n what w o u l d be d e s i r e d for an e f f e c t iv e analysi s. Nevertheless, w h i l e t h e p l a n n e r may p r o p e r l y a d v i s e as t o the r i s k s i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g w i t h inadequate data, he w i l l r a r e l y be in a position to suspend planning a c t i v i t i e s u n t i l more d e t a i l e d d a t a are available. Quite often it i s d i f f i c u l t t o postpone a project because o f political pressures o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f problems r e q u i r i n g immediate action. In such situations it is always worth considering the possibilities' of implementing t h e p r o j e c t i n stages, a1 though this always incurs additional c o s t , even i f s t a g i n g i s it technically feasible (sometimes i s not) The o t h e r p o s s i b i 1 i t y i s t o d e s i g n a p r o j e c t i n such a way t h a t e v e n t u a l l o s s e s due t o t h e u s e of imperfect data are simply minimized.

3.2

Data adequacy

Virtually a l l h y d r o l o g i c and n o n h y d r o l o g i c d a t a can b e c o n s i d e r e d t o be inadequate i n some r e s p e c t . The q u e s t i o n i s , how i n a d e q u a t e i s inadequate, o r , alternatively, how adequate i s adequate? ( W a t t and 1973). To answer t h i s Wilson, q u e s t i o n i t i s necessary t o d e f i n e t h e purpose f o r which the d a t a a r e t o b e u s e d and t h e c o n s e q u e n c i e s o f v a r i ous degrees of data In other words, imperfect ion. assessment of data sufficiency should be based not only on p r o b a b i l i s t i c statements r e l a t e d t o s a m p l i n g and p a r a m e t e r u n c e r t a i n t y e r r o r s b u t a l s o o n an e v a l u a t i o n o f how s e n s i t i v e a r e t h e key p r o j e c t parameters ( i n economic and o v e r a l l performance terms) to possible changes i n t h e d a t a base a c c u r a c y From a conceptual and scope. standpoint, the data can be considered adequate when the marginal cost associated with improving t h e d a t a i s equal t o t h e marginal benefits attributable t o As a p r a c t i c a l s u c h improvement. matter, however, implementation of t h i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d concept i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t because o f uncertainties in the evaluation of future benef it s .

As a m a t t e r o f f a c t , t h e i s s u e s discussed i n t h i s s e c t i o n a r e n o t o n l y t h e q u e s t i o n o f d a t a adequacy i t i s a " w a i t a w h i l e " syndrome i n anticipation that uncertainty about some of the crucial factors be influencing project design w i l l But u s u a l l y w a i t i n g w i l l reduced. n o t improve t h i n g s and, w i t h the

-35-

passage of time, u n c e r t a i n t y emerge.

new

clouds

of

n o t h i n g about d a t a compiled nongovernmental i n s t i t u t i o n s .

by

The case s t u d i e s appended t o t h i s book indicate that i n many planning e f f o r t s only e x i s t i n g data a r e used. Q u i t e often they are subject t o intensive processing t h a t its purpose a better has as evaluation of t h e r i s k s due t o a l l types o f uncertainties, including t h o s e due t o i m p e r f e c t i o n s i n the p r o j e c t d a t a base.

Generally i t i s advisable a l s o t o search f o r unusual d a t a sources, such as newspaper accounts, older residents' memories, tree rings, glacier deposits, etc. For e x a m p l e , h i g h - w a t e r marks a l o n g r i v e r s may b e useful i n d e l i n e a t i n g flooded areas. Such marks, i f t a k e n c a r e f u l l y , may be u s e d w i t h o t h e r d a t a t o compute peak d i s c h a r g e s o f t h e stream by i n d i r e c t methods (WMO 1974). Collection of hydrologic data s h o u l d n o t be l i m i t e d t o d y n a m i c processes such as streamflow, precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater flow, or s o i l moisture changes; static physical basin c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s h o u l d a l s o be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t (e.g., characteristics to be used i n rainfall-runoff models). Basin c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e usually grouped into three categories: (1) topographic, (2) s o i l s and g e o l o g y , and (3) l a n d c o v e r and l a n d - u s e . I n f o r m a t i o n on these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s commonly a v a i l a b l e from t h e v a r i o u s t y p e s of maps ( t o p o g r a p h i c , s o i l , l a n d c o v e r , etc.) t h a t are available through a p p r o p r i a t e governmental agencies. When n o s u i t a b l e maps e x i s t f o r an area, i t i s recommended t o c h e c k w h e t h e r some r e m o t e l y sensed d a t a are available. These d a t a may include conventional large-scale black-and-white a e r i a l photographs, h i g h - a l t i tude color-infrared Lansat photographs, and multispectral imagery. Severa 1 manuals a r e a v a i l a b l e t o a s s i s t i n a c q u i r i n g d i f f e r e n t i n f o r m a t i o n from r e m o t e l y sensed d a t e (e.g., Avery 1977)

3.3 Data acquisition

As a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d i n t h e f i r s t section o f t h i s chapter, the t e r m d a t a a c q u i s i t i o n has d i f f e r e n t c o n n o t a t i o n s t h a t depend o n the actual s i t u a t i o n concerning data availability. The methods o f field c o l l e c t i o n o f d a t a on t h e e l e m e n t s of the hydrological cycle and related factors f a l l outside the scope of this book. Several manuals, i n c l u d i n g those p u b l i s h e d by the World Meteorological O r g a n i z a t i o n (e.g., WO 1972). H are available on this subject. Moreover, in most countries collection of f i e l d data is a responsibility of spec i a 1 i zed hydrometeorologica-1 services, and t h e y s h o u l d be c o n s u l t e d i f t h e need for additional f i e l d data arises. The a c q u i s i t i o n o f hydrologic data means, above a l l , the l o c a t i o n o f the data sources i nc 1 ud i ng i n s p e c t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e s e d a t a as t o t h e i r s u i t a b i l i t y and sufficiency for s p e c i f i c planning effort.
Although it i s an a r b i t r a r y division, h y d r o l o g i c data sources may be d i v i d e d into usual and ones. The usual data unusua 1 sources include hydrological and m e t e o r o l o g i c a l y e a r b o o k s , r e p o r t s by v a r i o u s types o f e x p e r i m e n t a l and r e s e a r c h s t a t i o n s , r e c o r d s k e p t by r e g i o n a l w a t e r a u t h o r i t i e s , and t h e like. I t s h o u l d b e remembered t h a t many o r g a n i z a t i o n s a r e o f t e n a l m o s t c o m p l e t e l y unaware o f d a t a c o l l e c t e d by others; even governmental agencies o f t e n know v e r y little about d a t a collected by other governmental a g e n c i e s and a l m o s t

A 1 though collection of hydrologic data presents many problems, a c q u i s i t i o n o f water-use data i s u s u a l l y a much more c o m p l e x task. P r o b l e m s stemming from t h e scarcity of water-use data are s e r i ous, especial l y at the individual activity l e v e l (a f a r m , industrial enterprise, or household). As t h i n g s now s t a n d , i t i s widely i f not universally true they e x i s t a t t h a t these data, i f

all, c a n be c o l l e c t e d o n l y f r o m t h e w a t e r - u s e r s themselves.

As p o i n t e d o u t b y K i n d l e r and (19841, water-use data Russel 1 requirements vary according t o the approach taken toward r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f w a t e r use i n t h e p l a n n i n g e f f o r t . T h e r e a r e two b r o a d a p p r o a c h e s used. The f i r s t one r e q u i r e s d a t a o n a s e t o f s e v e r a l i n p u t s t o each w a t e r - u s e activity (incuding the water i t s e l f ) , each a c t i v i t y ' s a s s o c i a t e d p r i c e s and c o s t s , and a s e t o f t o t a l including outputs of outputs , pollution, with their associated p r i c e s and c o s t s . Such d a t a can o n l y come f r o m r e p e a t e d o b s e r v a t i o n of t h e same w a t e r - u s e r over time (say, m o n t h l y t o t a l s over several years) o r simultaneous o b s e r v a t i o n o f many u s e r s o f t h e same s o r t a t t h e same t i m e ( s a y 50 o r so u s e r s ) . For s e l f - e v i d e n t reasons t h e f i r s t source i s known as a t i m e s e r i e s , t h e second as a c r o s s section. Under c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s and u s i n g c o r r e c t techniques, i t i s possible to pool the time s e r i e s and SO that cross-sectional data, several i n a d e q u a t e d a t a s e t s may be combined i n t o one w i t h enough s i z e and v a r i a t i o n t o b e h e l p f u l (see, f o r example, J o h n s t o n 1 9 7 2 ) . But, under a l l circumstances, extreme c a r e must be e x e r c i s e d in the interpretation of the available s t a t i s t i c a l information, especially t h e p r i c e - q u a n t i t y d a t a (see K i n d l e r and R u s s e l l 1984 f o r more d e t a i l ) .
The second approach is d e t e r m i n e d by t h e p r o c e s s f o r w h i c h t h e w a t e r i s used. I t requires data o n w h a t i s g o i n g o n w i t h i n and among t h e many u n i t p r o c e s s e s o f a s i n g l e water-use a c t i v i t y . T h i s approach amounts to a summation o f a l l i n d i v i d u a l w a t e r demands w h i c h can produce a large number of a l t e r n a t i v e a c t i v i t y designs. These i n t u r n can be used t o designs d e f i n e w a t e r - u s e r e l a t i o n s and u n i t water-use coefficients for specific a c t i v i t i e s such as s t e e l rolling, paper production, household water u s e , and t h e l i k e . Water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g needs h y d r o l o g i c and n o n h y d r o l o g i c

(among them, water-use) data. I t s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e s e two b r o a d d a t a s e t s s h o u l d be m u t u a l l y c o n s i s t e n t i f t h e y a r e used i n t h e same model. Spending u n j u s t i f i e d t i m e and r e s o u r c e s , f o r i n s t a n c e , o n t h e r e f i n e m e n t and improvement o f t h e h y d r o l o g i c d a t a base a t t h e expense o f t h e d e p t h and scope o f other nonhydrological data should a l w a y s be a v o i d e d . I n o t h e r words, do n o t t r y t o i m p r o v e one s e t o f if another set of equal data importance to the model, for w h a t e v e r r e a s o n s , i s bad. One o f t h e common problems which make data acquisition difficult i s that hydrologic data a r e always c o l l e c t e d w i t h i n the w a t e r shed boundaries, while nonhydrologic data u s u a l l y r e f e r to different spatial units that follow the political and econom i c subdivisions of t h e a r e a under consideration. A d j u s t m e n t s m u s t be made to make a l l ' p r o j e c t d a t a c o m p a t i b l e i n t i m e and space.

3.4 Data quality control

In this chapter, quality control connotes t h e steps t h a t s h o u l d be t a k e n t o e n s u r e t h a t d a t a of good q u a l i t y a r e used i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f a p l a n . These s t e p s u s u a l l y include preliminary checking o f d a t a and d e t e c t i o n o f e r r o r s b y i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y checks. The p r e l i m i n a r y c h e c k i n g must e n s u r e t h e o v e r a l l correctness o f indicative i n f o r m a t i o n ; s i m p l e g e o g r a p h i c a l and arithmetical checks should be a p p l i e d t o see i f t h e d a t a p r o v i d e an a p p r o p r i a t e l o n g - t e r m p i c t u r e o f p a s t events concerning b o t h water a v a i l a b i l i t y and w a t e r use i n t h e r e g i o n under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . In this p r o c e s s , d a t a gaps w h i c h may a f f e c t outcomes o f the p l a n should be i d e n t i f i e d , and t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f f i l l i n g s u c h gaps b y e s t i m a t i o n o r i n t e r p o l a t i o n s h o u l d be a n a l y z e d . I t should b e noted t h a t f r e q u e n t l y such a n a l y s i s i s t o o complex t o b e done manually, and not much p r e l i m i n a r y c h e c k i n g can b e done before the data are transferred i n t o the computer and prepared f o r machine p r o c e s s i n g .

both

D a t a i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s a r e most o f t e n due t o measurement e r r o r s o r measurement b e i n g c r e d i t e d t o t h e wrong t i m e , b u t c a u t i o n i s u r g e d i n making d a t a a d j u s t m e n t s t o o e a s i l y without s o l i d r e f l e c t i o n as t o t h e p o s s i b l e sources o f e r r o r . should Data q u a l i t y c o n t r o l i nc 1 ude check i n g how also representative are the data f o r the current hydrological conditions i n a given b a s i n. This pertains e s p e c i a l l y t o streamflow series i n a basin subject to large-scale man-made changes, e.g., by deforestation or strip mining. A l t h o u g h r e l a t i v e - l y l o n g r e c o r d s may b e a v a i l a b l e , t h e y can no l o n g e r b e considered representative unless man-made changes i n t h e b a s i n have taken into been appropr ia t e 1 y account, which i s usually a very d i f f i c u l t task. Techniques f o r q u a l i t y c o n t r o l o f data d i f f e r for various data types. For example, t h e q u a l i t y o f streamflow records f o r a given s t r e a m may be checked by c o m p a r i n g them w i t h c o n c u r r e n t records f o r n e a r b y s t r e a m s and w i t h c o n c u r r e n t l y recorded other hydrologic parameters, such as p r e c i p i t a t i o n and t e m p e r a t u r e (WMO 1 9 7 4 ) . The of f l o o d h y d r o g r a p h s i s routing flood o f t e n used for checking discharges recorded a t d f f erent stream. profiles a l o n g t h e same Groundwater level f l u c t u a t ons may a l s o b e used i n q u a l i t y con r o l of p r e c i p i t a t i o n and s t r e a m f l o w d a t a . The d a t a a c c u r a c y r e q u r emen t s should be consistent w t h the q u a l i t y and s a m p l i n g adequacy o f t h e d a t a u s e d and w i t h t h e d e g r e e o f a c c u r a c y r e q u i r e d by t h e s p e c i f i c analysis. In many instances, graphical and r e l a t i v e l y simple computa t i ona 1 methods are s u f f i c i e n t l y accurate f o r the data and p u r p o s e s i n v o l v e d .

t h e methods a d o p t e d f o r preparation of a plan. Data p r o c e s s i n g u s u a l l y includes s t a t i s t i c a l analysis, such as c o m p u t a t i o n o f means, s t a n d a r d deviations, correlation c o e f f i c i e n t s , l a g times, parameters f r equency distributions, of durations, and o t h e r statistical parameters describing both the temporal and s p a t i a l s t r u c t u r e of t h e processes t h a t determine water a v a i l a b i l i t y and w a t e r use in a given region. Several of these s t a t i s t i c s a r e used f o r f i l l i n g d a t a gaps b y r e g r e s s i o n and c o r r e l a t i o n methods. Data p r o c e s s i n g a l s o o f t e n includes conversion o f data into and compatible time s c a 1 es c o n s i s t e n t measurement u n i t s (e.g., c o n v e r s i o n o f mean f l o w i n t e n s i t i e s i n t o f l o w volumes o v e r a p e r i o d o f time)

3.5

Data processing and screening

I n many c a s e s i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o process c o l l e c t e d data into a form compatible w i t h requirements o f

One of the purposes of statistical data processing is screening of data to obtain h o m o g e n e i t y among d a t a o f v a r i o u s kinds. Screening g e n e r a l l y has t h r e e purposes. One p u r p o s e is to reduce t h e d a t a t o t h e s t a n d a r d base p e r i o d of r e c o r d . T h i s i s necessary because a frequent problem i n generalization of hydrologic and n o n h y d r o l o g i c d a t a stems f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t they refer to' different of r e c o r d . Attempts to periods compare records without making appropriate adjustments w i l l mix v a r i a t i o n i n space w i t h v a r i a t i o n i n time. The second p u r p o s e is to eliminate or reduce t h e e f f e c t s o f inconsistencies i n data records. S i m p l e examples o f such s c r e e n i n g p r o c e d u r e s a r e a double-mass curve (WMO 1974) a p p l i e d t o analysis detect change o f exposure a t a p r e c i p i t a t i o n s t a t i o n and a t i m e s e r i e s a n a l y s i s u s e d t o e v a l u a t e how accurately streamflow records represent the natural runoff of a catchment area. The t h i r d p u r p o s e i s data reconciliation, since data from d i f f e r e n t sources r e l a t i n g t o t h e same v a r i a b l e may n o t b e t h e same o r e v e n c o m p a t i b l e . Therefore, one m u s t r e c o n c i l e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s and come t o an e x p l i c i t d e c i s i o n about what t o u s e as p l a n n i n g d a t a . Examples i n c l u d e d i f f e r e n c e s among hydrologic data collected

-38-

concurrently by d i f f e r e n t hydrologic agencies, population projections made b y a p p l i c a t i o n o f different methods or a c c o r d i n g t o d i f f e r e n t spatial u n i t s , or monthly data t h a t d o n o t add up t o same t o t a l as d a t a from a d i f f e r e n t source t h a t gives t h e d a t a as a n a n n u a l b a s i s . The data processing and needs are highly s c r e e n i ng s i t u a t i o n - d e p e n d e n t , and t h e level of effort i s g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by w h e t h e r o r n o t a p p r o p r i a t e computer f a c i l i t i e s are available.
,

processing, and t h e need f o r a p l a n - s p e c i f i c d a t a base o r d a t a - b a s e s y s t e m may even a r i s e . The term data base was introduced into the theory and p r a c t i c e o f d a t a management b y t h e end of t h e 60s. A d a t a base connotes a c o l l e c t i o n o f v a r i o u s fSles, including types of data r e l a t i o n s among t h e s e f i l e s , d a t a B u t , as a g g r e g a t e s , and d a t a i t e m s . happens o f t e n t o a f a s h i o n a b l e t e r m , many o r g a n i z a t i o n s s t a r t e d c a l l i n g their f i l e s d a t a bases, changing only t h e name w i t h o u t g i v i n g n o t i c e to such fundamental data-base properties as e x c l u s i o n o f d a t a redundancy, provision for data independence and p r o t e c t i o n , p r e c i s e d e f i n i t i o n o f m u t u a l r e l a t i o n s among d i f f e r e n t data, and p r o v i s i o n o f real-time access t o s t o r e d d a t a . The i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e s e p r o p e r t i e s has grown c o n s i d e r a b l y w i t h t h e development o f b e t t e r software for d a t a p r o c e s s i n g and management. Data-base systems a r e sometimes c a l l e d d a t a banks; they include several data bases stored on peripheral storage devices and c o l l e c t i o n s o f computer programs f o r such typical data processing operations as data search, retrieval, updating, input, and ( 0r del e t ion. In addition alternatively), the system may include on-line u s e r s who i n t e r a c t with data bases from remote terminals.

3.6 Data information systems

Data systems v a r y c o n s i d e r a b l y , d e p e n d i n g on t h e c h a r a c t e r and scope of the specific planning e f f o r t . For long-range planning, steady accumulation, a n a l y s i s , and d i s p l a y o f d a t a o v e r p e r i o d s o f h o u r s , days, o r months is sufficient, while operational p l a n n i n g r e q u i r e s more 1 ess immediate r e c e ip t , or processing, and r e t r a n s m i t t a l of information. Therefore, wh l e s e r v i n g one f u n c t i o n a l need w e l l , a d a t a s y s t e m does n o t n e c e s s a r 1 Y serve another. What t y p e o f data informat on s y s t e m i s a d v i s a b l e f o r a g i v e n p an depends v e r y much o n t h e l e v e l o f effort, access to compu t e r installations, a v a i l a b i l i t y o f data A maagement experts, etc. plan-specific consciousness should e x i s t a t a l l times i n developing a u s a b l e d a t a i n f o r m a t i o n system t h a t will s u i t m o s t a d e q u a t e l y t h e needs o f t h e water resources planner in the specific context. Sometimes t h e p l a n i n v o l v e s a v e r y l a r g e amount o f d a t a , and t h e t a s k o f d a t a h a n d l i n g , compiling analytical results, and converting them to fit plan r e q u i r e m e n t s c a n n o t be coped w i t h by c o n v e n t i o n a l methods. Evaluation o f t h e d a t a c o l l e c t e d may a l s o b e a d e a l i ng with p r o b 1 em conventionally tabulated values in high numbers means always an u n j u s t i f i e d e x p e n d i t u r e i n terms o f c o s t , a c c u r a c y , and t i m e . I n such cases, t h e d a t a can o n l y be handled w i t h the aid of computer data

3.7

References

Andr e j anov, V.G. 1975. M e t e o r o l o g i c a l and H y d r o l o g i c a l Data R e q u i r e d i n P l a n n i n g t h e Development o f Water R e s o u r c e s . Operational Hydrology Report No.5, WMO No. 419, WMO, Geneva. Avery, E . 1977. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f Photographs, 3 r d ed. Aer i a1 Co., Burgess Publishing Minneapolis. Johnston, J. 1972. Econometric Methods. M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

K i n d l e r , J., and C . S . Russell, in Bower, c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h B.T. I. Gouevsky, D.R. Maidment, R.W.T. Sewel 1 (eds.) and 1984. Mode 1 i n g Water Demands. Academic p r e s s , London.

WO H

.
WO H

Wor I d Meteorological 1972. Casebook Organization, on H y d r o l o g i c a l Network D e s i g n Practice, W O No. H 324. WHO, Geneva. Wor I d Meteorological Organization. 1974. Guide 'to H y d r o l o g i c a l P r a c t i c e s , 3 r d ed., 168. WHO, Geneva. W O No. H

Unesco/WMO. 1981. W a t e r R e s o u r c e s Assessment A c t i v i t i e s , Handbook f o r National Evaluation (Draft), Paris.

U.S.

OTA - U.S. Office of 1982. Technology Assessment. Use of Models for Water R e s o u r c e s Management, Planning and P o l i c y . OTA, Washington, D.C.

Yevjevich, V. 1973 Open i ng remarks. In Decisions w i t h Inadequate Hydrologic Data. Proceedings of the Second in International Sympos i u m Hydrology, S ep t embe r 1972. Water Resources Publications, F o r t C o l l i n s , Colorado.

W a t t , W.E., and K.C. Wilson. 1973. An economic approach for e v a 1 u a t i ng the adequacy of hydrologic data. I n Proceedings of the Second International in Hydrology, Sympos i um Water R e s o u r c e s September 1972. Publications, Fort Col 1 i n s , Colorado.

4. Formulation and screening o f project alternatives

T h i s chapter i s concerned w i t h t h e f o r m u l a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g o f p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s : these u s u a l l y c o n s t i t u t e the t h i r d stage i n the water resources planning process. This stage i nc 1 udes the classification of project alternatives, the actual generation of project alternatives, checking t h a t these a l t e r n a t i v e plans are compatible with other plans, checking t h a t t h e models u s e d a r e c a l i b r a t e d and c r e d i b l e , and u s i n g hierarchical and multiobjective analysis t o screen the various project alternatives. T h i s stage leads t o t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f s e l e c t e d alternative p r o j e c t s and t o t h e evaluation of their r e 1 a t iv e a d v a n t a g e s and d i s a d v a n t a g e s .

a l t e r n a t i v e s , have been i n c r e a s i n g l y u s e d i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management. When S t a g e 1, plan i n i t i a t i o n p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g , and S t a g e 2 , d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and p r o c e s s i n g , have been completed, a p l a n i s r e a d y for S t a g e 3, w h i c h encompasses t h e f o r m u l a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g o f p r o j e c t alternatives. In this stage, several s t e p s must be f o l l o w e d . These i n c l u d e and a) the verbal articulation quantification of o b j e c t iv e s constraints--hydrological, institutional, financial, etc. measures--structural nonstructural the s y s tem s components (e.g. and s u b a r e a s ) . the system's demands : and and

4.1 Overview of the evaluation of alternatives stage

The p l a n n i n g and management o f water r e s o u r c e s and w a t e r - r e l a t e d l a n d r e s o u r c e s i s b o t h a n a r t and a s c i e n c e , and i t i n v o l v e s t h e u t m o s t u t i l i z a t i o n o f many d i s c i p l i n e s . In t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , f o r e c a s t s and p r e d i c t i o n s m u s t b e made u n d e r risk and uncertainty. In addition, decision-makers must a n a l y z e t h e various alternative policies that o f t e n r e f l e c t c o n f l i c t i n g economic, societal, environmental, and p o l i t i c a l forces. A water resources p l a n has a v i a b l e chance o f b e i n g i f i t addresses implemented o n l y i t s e l f t o the m u l t i p l e objectives and g o a l s o f t h e r e g i o n c o n c e r n e d . With ever-increasing pub1 i c awareness o f and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the decision-making process (as evidenced b y t h e many c i t i z e n s ' advisory boards, active public hearings, e t c . ) , t h e planning task ha,s become even harder. C o n s e q u e n t l y , methods and a p p r o a c h e s from system a n a l y s i s , particularly those t h a t a r e designed t o h e l p decision-makers choose among

( r e g i o n s) subbasins

projected

m u n i c i p a l and/or domestic industrial agr i c u l t u r a l fish and/or wildlife hab i t a t

the system's projected supply c a p a b i l i t i e s :

groundwater s u r f a c e water i n t e r b a s i n water transfer reclaimed water etc.

w a t e r q u a l i t y p r o b l e m s and/ or p o t e n t i a l contaminations

* * *
J(

f l o o d problems and/or for flood protection recreation h yd r o-power etc. based on

needs

conduct o f analysis

multiobjective

discussion o f the r e s u l t s w i t h decision-makers a t the 1 eve 1 s, as v a r i ous appropriate evaluation of the decision-makers' preferences, with appropriate response by to mak i ng modi f i c a t i o n (s) the plan The f i n a l result process i s t h e p o l i t i c a l continue or discontinue activity. If t h e dec proceed, t h e n e x t s t e p s
J(

b) c o n c e p t a n a l y s i s f o l l o w i n g steps:

the

generation of severa 1 alternative plans with Pareto optimal solutions (i.e., a s o l u t i o n w h e r e one o b j e c t iv e c a n b e i mproved only a t t h e expense of degrad i ng another and their o b j e c t i ve) respective trade-offs evaluation of a l t e r n a t i v e plans conduct ana 1 y s e s of the

of this decision t o he p l a n n i n g sion is to nc 1 ude

*
J :

a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o complete t h e p l a n n i n g process appropriation of funds ( c o u l d b e t h e same as the authorization, in some c o u n t r i es) designation o f an agency ( o r agenc i es) t o comp 1 e t e t h e p 1 ann i n g p r o c e s s formation o f a regional (as planning e n t it y a p p r o p r ia t e )

* * *
4.2
e

risk-benefit

conduct o f impact analyses on t h e a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s

When S t a g e 3 - - t h e formulation and s c r e e n i n g o f a l t e r n a t i v e s - - h a s b e e n c o m p l e t e d , i t must b e d e c i d e d if more data a r e needed. If possible, decisions on specific m o d e l s s h o u l d b e p o s t p o n e d u n t i l any needed a d d i t i o n a l d a t a a r e a c q u i r e d or until a data base becomes available. When p l a n a l t e r n a t i v e s s u i t a b l e for potential i m p l e m e n t a t i o n have b e e n s e l e c t e d , t h i s marks t h e end o f the p r e f e a s i b i l i t y part of the study. Toward t h e end o f S t a g e 3, t h e p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s has t o t a k e over. In particular, the following s t e p s s h o u l d be taken:

Classification of alternatives

conduct of pub1 i c hearings, as a p p r o p r i a t e , t o generate support f o r the plan b y t h e p u b l i c and other important c o n s t i t u e n c i es e v a l u a t i o n o f comments and s u g g e s t i o n s made b y the p u b l i c and t h e a g e n c i e s

J(

I n t h e p l a n n i n g process, all a 1 t e r n a t iv e s p l aus ib 1 e project s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d - - f e a s i b l e and nonfeasible, struct u r a 1 and nonstructural, water and A I t h o u g h some may v i e w "non-water the study of n o n f e a s ib l e a l t e r n a t i v e s as w a s t e f u l , important and v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n m i g h t be gained from such effort: for example, a s e n s i b l e measure o r p l a n t h a t happens t o b e a t t h e t i m e politically or institutionally i n f e a s i b l e c a n shed l i g h t on t h e cost associated with existing i n s t i t u t i o n a l impediments and m i g h t i n d i c a t e s p e c i f i c ways f o r r e m o v i n g or alleviating such obstacles. Non-wa t e r alternatives o f ten c o n s t i t u t e an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f what

."

-43-

is commonly known as a w a t e r a l t e r n a t i v e package: for example, land transportation might be considered as an a l t e r n a t i v e t o navigation. Technical constraints may a l s o i n d i c a t e t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a dam alternatives: for example, s i t e m i g h t have a n e x c e l l e n t r o c k f o u n d a t i o n b u t would r e q u i r e major work in relocating people or transportation 1 i nes, r e r o u t i ng w h i l e another l o c a t i o n might r e q u i r e e x t e n s i v e f o u n d a t i o n work.
Furthermore, it must be realized that there are often d i f f e r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e s t o accomplish For example, t h e same o b j e c t i v e . f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n c a n be a c h i e v e d b y retention structures, by flood levees, o r by z o n i n g t o p r e v e n t settlements i n flood-prone areas. On t h e o t h e r hand, a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r water supply i n c l u d e t h e use o f g r o u n d or s u r f a c e w a t e r or b o t h Also, storage (conjunctive use). f o r a w a t e r s u p p l y may p o s s i b l y b e p r o v i d e d e i t h e r b e h i n d a l a r g e dam i n t h e m a i n r i v e r o r b e h i n d many smaller dams located in the tributaries. Hydro-power g e n e r a t i o n should be considered within a b r o a d e r economic s c a l e , w i t h n u c l e a r or f o s s i l - f i r e generating units c o n s i d e r e d as p a r t o f t h e system. Such c o n s i d e r a t i o n s commonly l e a d t o t h e use of pumped s t o r a g e p l a n t s , energy d u r i ng where excess l o w - c o n s u m p t i o n p e r ods i s u s e d t o pump w a t e r i n t o a emporary s t o r a g e rom w h i c h i t is a t high elevation, released through turbines at peak-demand h o u r s . Although a c a s s i f i c a t i o n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s can be h e l p f u l for pedagogical purposes, the planner should be careful to avoid simplistic dichotomies in c 1 ass i f y i ng alternatives--for instance, water vs. non-wa t e r a1 t e r n a t i v e s - - o r similar simpleminded classifications of water i s s u e s , s u c h as g r o u n d v s . surface water, water q u a n t i t y vs. q u a l i t y , water supply vs. demand, etc. The successful operation, m a i n t e n a n c e , and management o f any water resources system should u t l i m a t e l y rranscend the b a r r i e r s

created by these artificial c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and make u s e o f the attributes of all p l a n components and t h e s y s t e m ' s p o t e n t i a l s .

4.3 Generation of alternatives

D u r i n g Stage 3 o f t h e p l a n n i n g process--the formulation and of project s c r e e n i ng alternatives--several possibilities exist i n terms of g e n e r a t i o n and screening o f alternatives. These include the following. (i)

A s m a l l number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s leads t o elimination of the screening step.

( i i ) A l a r g e number o f alternatives the use of necess i t a t e s mathematical models (this is o f t e n t h e case f o r long-range and r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g ) . ( i i i ) A l a r g e number o f alternatives r e q u i r e s t h e use o f h i e r a r c h i c a l screening i n stages, w i t h an increasing r i g i d i t y o f selection and/or exclusion c r i t e r i a being a d o p t e d as t h e s c r e e n i n g p r o c e s s proceeds. This procedure a l s o requires that planning p h i l o s o p h i e s b e a g r e e d upon b y a l l concerned p a r t i e s . I t should be c l e a r l y noted t h a t S t a g e 3 and S t a g e 4 ( d e v e l o p m e n t o f final study results) are not mutually exclusive, and o f t e n some overlapping occurs. In particular, t h e d i s c u s s i o n and a r g u m e n t s t h a t t a k e p l a c e i n Stage 3 should be recorded so t h a t a c t i v i t i e s a t Stage 4 c a n be a p p r o p r i a t e y g u i d e d . T h i s i s e v e n more c r i t i c a l i f a new team works on Stage 4. The p l a n n e r who i s engaged in the process of generating projects may a 1 t e r n a t iv e d i f f e r e n t i a t e between cases w i t h a r e l a t i v e l y modest number o f d i s c r e t e a l t e r n a t i v e s and t h o s e w i t h a v e r y 1arge (inf init e and c o n t i nuous) In the number of alternatives. f o r m e r case, the alternatives are p r i m a r i l y generated d i r e c t l y through b r a i n s t o r m i n g and by p e r t u r b a t i o n o f In the previous alternatives.

l a t t e r - - t h e c o n t i n u o u s c a s e - - t h e use o f m o d e l s i s a l m o s t i m p e r a t i v e , and t h e r o l e o f t h e a n a l y s t and/or the p l a n n e r and t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r i s t o decide which of the system's objectives s h o u l d be k e p t as s u c h and w h i c h s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a s constraints. The u s e o f m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l s i n the generation o f alternative p:ans i s m o s t i m p o r t a n t and v a l u a b l e when t r a d e - o f f s a r e c o n s i d e r e d . The h i e r a r c h i c a l approach, w h i c h a l l o w s the aggregation o f s e v e r a l models i n t o an o v e r a l l model, c a n b e v e r y h e l p f u l here. For example, linear programming a l l o c a t i o n models can be i n t e g r a t e d w i t h dynamic programming capacity--expansion models, and further i n t e g r a t i o n can t a k e p l a c e w i t h s t r e a m f l o w s i m u l a t i o n models, etc.--all within a hierarchical m u l t i o b j e c t i v e framework. 4.4 M o d e l c r e d i b i l i t y a n d m o d e l calibration Model c r e d i b i l i t y and model calibration i m p l y two d i f f e r e n t b u t r e l a t e d issues. The c r e d i b i l i t y o f a model r e f e r s t o t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e model, w h i l e model calibration connotes estimation of model parameters. Models always represent an a b s t r a c t i o n o f those features o f the real world t h a t a r e considered r e l e v a n t b y t h e model b u i l d e r . They t h e r e f o r e a r e o n l y as good as t h e perception of their creators. Because o f this, they are, and s h o u l d be, o n l y one p a r t o f t h e d e c i s i o n process. The a c c e p t a n c e o f a l l o r p a r t o f t h e model c o n c l u s i o n s must be l e f t t o t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f the responsible engineer. The engineer s h o u l d make a l l e f f o r t s t o v a l i d a t e o r v e r i f y t h e models. Many approaches and d if f erent philosophies e x i s t (e.g., how t o v e r i f y m o d e l s employed f o r l o n g - t e r m p r e d i c t i o n f o r future-use l e v e l s ) . There i s a l s o t h e q u e s t i o n o f overall model acceptance--model credibility i n t h e eyes o f the decision-makers, their staff, the general p u b l i c , e t c . The p r o b l e m o f

model c r e d i b i l i t y needs t o be d e a l t the planning w i t h i n a l l stages o f process. P r o b a b l y t h e b e s t way i s t o have an open d i s c u s s i o n a b o u t t h e model t o be used b o t h w i t h t h e with the decision-makers and a f f e c t e d p a r t i e s i n t h e e a r l y stages o f model s e l e c t i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e OTA study (U.S. OTA 19821, t h e l a c k o f model c r e d i b i l i t y c o n s t . i t u t e s one o f the m o s t common r e a s o n s f o r t h e l a c k o f u s e o f models b y d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and other policy analysts. There a r e many e l e m e n t s that contribute t o the c r e d i b i l i t y level o f any i n d i v i d u a l model (see Haimes 19811, i n c l u d i n g ( i ) t h e scope o f t h e model, ( i i ) i t s s t r u c t u r e , ( i i i ) i t s m o d u l a r i t y aspects, (iv) the it number of objectives that e v a l u a t e s , (v) t h e a c c e p t a b i 1 i t y and r o b u s t n e s s o f t h e assumptions made ( b o t h i m p l i c i t l y and e x p l i c i t l y ) , (vi) t h e q u a l i t y o f i t s d a t a base, (vii) the sophistication o f the o p t i m i z a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s used, ( v i i i ) the capability of t h e computers of the used, (ix) the quality interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary setup of t h e group t h a t developed t h e model, (x) t h e l e v e l o f model validation, (xi) the model's v e r i f i c a t i o n and t e s t i n g , and (xii) the level of the risk and u n c e r t a i n t y elements. In short, the needs and i m p o r t a n c e o f model c r e d i b i l i t y in a1 1 aspects and phases o f the process cannot be p 1 ann i ng overemphasized. Model c a l i b r a t i o n , as d e f i n e d earlier, i s a prerequisite for the models in use o f . mathematical systems a n a l y s i s . The c a l i b r a t i o n o f a model i m p l i e s a commitment of time and financial resources. T h e r e f o r e , models m u s t b e a d j u s t e d and/or a d a p t e d t o t h e d e g r e e of accuracy r e q u i r e d a t t h e stage i n q u e s t i on. The u s e o f m o r e - s o p h i s t i c a t e d m o d e l s may b e o f great help in c a l i b r a t i n g t h e s i m p l i f i e d and l e s s e x p e n s i v e models t h a t can be used

-45-

with higher efficiency for A good and p r e l i m i n a r y screening. proper c a l i b r a t i o n o f mathematical models may e n c o u r a g e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t o u s e them as a h e l p f u l t o o l . Models s h o u l d n o t only be calibrated, they also must b e indepently v e r i f i e d . Often modelers tend t o use a l l t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n i n t h e c a l i b r a t i o n phase and have n o o r l i t t l e reserved information f o r the v e r i f i c a t i o n phase.

analyst(s), the four or five a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s a r e ready for evaluation b y t h e p u b l i c and/or p o l i c y a n a l y s t s and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s . The a n a l y s t , when c o n s u l t i n g with such decision-makers as p o l i i c i a n s and s e n i o r b u r e a u c r a t s , m u s t b e aware t h a t t h e y may t r y at t h i s stage t o exclude a l t e r n a t i v e s t h a t compete w i t h t h o s e that they f avo Decision-makers are comm s s i o n e d , e l e c t e d , a p p o i n t e d , o r i n some other way given the a u t h o r i t y and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o make d e c i s i o n s , and t h e r e f o r e t h e a n a l y s t should not play that role. Decision-makers can a l s o identify pol it i c a l and institutional c o n s t r a i n t s t h a t w o u l d e x c l u d e some alternatives. The m a i n outlines must be p r e s e n t e d t o p o l i t i c i a n s , b u r e a u c r a t s , and a f f e c t e d a g e n c i e s e a r l y enough and t h o r o u g h l y enough that they w i l l n o t be taken by s u r p r i se and react,perhaps automatically, by completely r e j e c t i n g t h e p l a n (which f o r them is the easiest way to react). T h o r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n s w i l l h e l p make them amenable t o a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e p l a n and t o i d e n t i f y i n g themselves w i t h i t , so t h a t t h e y may u l t i m a t e l y become i t s a d v o c a t e s . I n screening a l t e r n a t i v e s , the planners should simultaneously represent four possibly c o n f l i c t i n g i n t e r e s t s , v i e w s and p e r s p e c t i v e s : i) t h e i r agency o r i e n t a t i ons) the public manifested participation (its mission and

4.5 Interaction between analyst and decision -maker

The f o l l o w i n g t h r e e g r o u p s c a n be i d e n t i f i e d r e l e v a n t t o t h i s s t a g e o f the p l a n n i n g process: i) ii) the planners the systems analyst, who provides technical support t o the planners, the policy-makers participants and public

iii)

Given t h a t t h e p l a n n e r s have s e v e r a l o b j e c t i v e s on t h e i r p l a n n i n g agenda ( s u c h as w a t e r s u p p l y , f l o o d c o n t r o l , water q u a l i t y , r e c r e a t i o n ) , t h e p l a n n e r s may a t the first i n t e r a t i o n develop a f i r s t - c u t plan or five or o p t i o n o f about four alternative plans. The a n a l y s t s t h e n use mathematical models t h a t incorporate the various input-output relationships, . objectives, and constraints to cast these a l t e r n a t i v e plans i n a q u a n t i t i a t i v e form In particular, when m u l t i o b j e c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i o n models and m e t h o d o l o g i e s a r e u s e d , then Pareto optimal s o l u t i o n s and t h e i r corresponding t r a d e - o f f s are also generated--all associated w i t h the i n i t i a l f i r s t - c u t p l a n s generated by the planners. The planners reevaluate t h e i r original four o r f i v e a l t e r n a t i v e s and m o d i f y them a s appropriate, using the q u a n t i t a t i v e information generated by the The surrogate worth analysts t r a d e - o f f method, f o r example, can t h e n b e used h e r e i n a s i m u l a t i o n mode. Following several iterations among the planners and the

ii)

at large as through pub1 i c

i i i ) t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l judgment
iv) t h e o v e r a l l g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s o f the o r i g i n a l planning study

These four overlapping p e r s p e c t i v e s may n o t n e c e s s a r i l y b e compatible--they are o f t e n not. One o f the planners' objectives should be the development and/or f o r m u l a t i o n o f a f i n a l p l a n t h a t can enhance t h e s o c i a l w e l l - b e i n g o f t h e p e o p l e i n t h e r e g i o n , can u l t i m a t e l y

-46-

b e a c c e p t e d b y t h e p u b l i c and o t h e r p o l i c y o r d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s , and can a l s o be implementable. In the screening process, this objective should guide t h e planners toward a compromise p l a n o r s o l u t i o n t h a t is v i a b l e and t h a t has a r e a s o n a b l e chance o f a c c e p t a n c e ; o t h e r w i s e , t h e p l a n n i n g e f f o r t w o u l d be o n l y an e x e r c i se. Inherent in multiobjective methodologies is o p t i m i z a t i on i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e decision-makers and t h e s o l i c i t a t i o n o f t h e i r i n p u t s and p r e f e r e n c e s . I n the haumee R i v e r B a s i n Case S t u d y (see Case Study 41, for example, this i n t e r a c t io n took p l ace numerous times. The n o t i o n t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a s i n g l e decision-maker i n public projects is, of c o u r s e , n a i v e and unrealistic. I n t h e Maumee S t u d y , there was continuous and c l o s e i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e a n a l y s t s and the decision-makers at various levels of the decision-making hierarchy. Each o f t h e s e l e v e l s had i t s own i n f l u e n c e and i m p a c t o n t h e s t u d y outcome. Very o f t e n , the a n l a y s t s were t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s themselves. The h ie r a r c h y of the d e c i s i o n makers c o n s i s t e d o f P 1 ann i ng B o a r d members and t h e i r close associates, who in turn centralized t h e d a t a and p r o v i d e d t h e needed t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e P l a n n i n g Board. I n addition, t h i s hierarchy included the study manager and his staff, plus associates a t the executive level o f t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission, t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission itself, the Citizens' Advisory Committee, t h e Study committee, t h e Steering Commi t t e e , the Water the pub 1 i c Resources Counc i 1 , t h r o u g h v a r i o u s p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , and other agencies who were not r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e above g r o u p s o f decision-makers but who have influence i n the region.

output. There a r e for this:

several

reasons

1) C o o p e r a t i o n may n o t b e c o n s i d e r e d i m p o r t a n t by a l l of t h e agencies

2) Too o f t e n a p e r s o n w i t h o u t much responsibility or authority is sent t o t h e meetings.

3) N o t a l l

meetings a r e attended, and r e p o r t s a r e n o t c o n s i d e r e d seriously.

4) T h e r e may b e b a s i c d i s a g r e e m e n t s
among t h e a g e n c i e s . Nevertheless, i t is important t h a t a water p l a n n o t be negated by t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f another agency's project, e.g., building a reservoir on t h e s i t e o f a major highway (or v i c e v e r s a ) ; a planned a g r i c u l t u r a l a expansion being flooded by reservoir; o r having water q u a l i t y improvement k i l l e d o f f b y a n o t h e r country's diversion o f flows. Thus, b e f o r e t h e f i n a l p l a n i s developed, i t i s important t h a t appropriate o f f ic i a 1 s (decision-makers) be i n v o l v e d - - t h o s e who c a n a g r e e t o modifications and w i l l e n s u r e t h a t t h e y a r e done. One s h o u l d t r y to incorporate at l e a s t some o f t h e c o m p a t i b i l i t y c o n d i t i o n s among p l a n n e d a c t i v i t i e s constraints i n the as expl i c i t a n a l y s i s - - i f t h e y a r e indeed b i n d i n g constraints. I t i s more e f f i c i e n t t o consider t h e c o m p a t i b i l i t y issues at the o u t s e t t h a n j u s t as a post-analysis matter. In c e r t a i n countries, public h e a r i n g s and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n a r e r e q u i r e d b y law p r i o r t o f i n a l of any major water approva 1 resources p r o j e c t that involves p u b l i c funds. These p u b l i c h e a r i n g s have a g r e a t advantage i n t h a t p u b l i c concerns, objections, and the views other t h a n t h o s e of i n t e r e s t e d agencies a r e heard, and o f t e n subsequent m o d i f i c a t i o n s a r e incorporated i n these plans. There is a need t o s y s t e m a t i z e this participation--to the extent possible--and integrate i t w i t h the p l ann i ng and s c r e e n i ng ent ir e

4.6

Compatibility with other plans and public participation

Even t h o u g h c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h agencies d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g process will not is essential, this necessarily lead t o a coordinated

-47-

process. The d e v e 1 opment (and design) o f questionnaires t h a t can a r t i c u l a t e p u b l i c preferences i n a c o g e n t way i s a l s o i m p o r t a n t . Also, the preliminary education o f the p u b l i c o n t h e i s s u e s a t s t a k e and the preparatory steps f o r public h e a r i n g s and e v a l u a t i o n o f these a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s s h o u l d be p l a n n e d w e l l i n advance.

v)

the need for using q u a n t i t a t i v e procedures

such

4.7 Procedures a n d techniques for screening alternatives

There a r e two p r i n c i p a l o p t i o n s for dealing w i t h the screening problem. I n one, a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e screened v i a o p t i m i z a t i o n c a r r i e d o u t o n t h e a g g r e g a t e d d a t a and t h e simplified system r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . A p p l i c a t i o n o f l i n e a r programming as a s c r e e n i n g d e v i c e i s a good example o f the f i r s t option--no a priori identification of discrete a l t e r n a t i v e s i s done. I n t h e second option, a set of p o t e n t ia 1 alternatives i s somehow d e v e l o p e d ( o f t e n based s i m p l y on experts' recommendtions), and t h e y a r e t h e n e v a l u a t e d and r a n k e d a c c o r d i n g t o some c r i t e r i a . I n both options a single c r i t e r i o n or a multitude of criteria may be employed. Consequently, single-criterion or multiple-criteria t e c h n i q u e s may be used. A p p r o p r i a t e p r o c e d u r e s and techniques include the scalar and vector l i n e a r programming method, t h e S T method, t h e E l e c t r e method, W the score cards method, etc. I n t e r a c t i v e man-machine procedures and d e c i s i o n s u p p o r t s y s t e m s a r e becoming more and more u s e d f o r s c r e e n i n g purposes. Screening o f a l t e r n a t i v e plans is a continuous and iterative process. The techniques and procedures used for screening p u r p o s e s a r e c l o s e l y and largely dependent on

' By means of optimization methods a large number of a l t e r n a t i v e s can b e e v a l u a t e d , but this can be a c h i e v e d o n l y a t t h e expense o f a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f a l l alternatives. By c o n t r a s t , a p u r e s i m u l a t i o n model may a l l o w f o r a very detailed description, but in this case o n l y a few a l t e r n a t i v e s can b e i n v e s t i g a t e d . Depending o n the p r o j e c t i n question, the r i g h t system a n a l y s i s t o o l should be selected. I n a s i t u a t i o n w i t h a few clear, distinct alternatives, one should probably n o t implement an optimization model, but should rather c h o o s e a model b y w h i c h t h e consequences o f each a l t e r n a t i v e c a n be assessed i n g r e a t d e t a i l . The o p p o s i t e argument o f c o u r s e a p p l i e s t o t h e s i t u a t i o n where a large number o f more o r l e s s dependent decision v a r i ab 1 es must be considered. (This represents an s y s tems ana 1 y s i s " o p t i ma 1 u s e o f technique.)

Any s c r e e n i n g p r o c e d u r e a t a n y s t a g e o f t h e p l a n n i n g phase r e q u i r e s that t h e f o l l o w i n g items be decided upon b y consensus o f the screening team: a) a set of decision variables t o be considered a t the g i v e n stage (these become more s p e c i f i c and d e t a i l e d a s t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s advances f r o m one s t a g e t o t h e n e x t ) screening criteria to be

b) a s e t o f emp 1 o y e d

The s c r e e n i n g team stage t o stage.

may

vary

from

i)
ii)

the level o f planning t h e stage i n t h e p l a n n i n g proces

A g r o u p t e c h n i q u e (such as t h e group technique) for nom i na I screening alternatives at this i n i t i a l l e v e l may b e recommended, s i n c e p o l i t i c i a n s may a r g u e f o r a long time without result i f the arguments a r e n o t s t a t e d e x p l i c i t l y i n w r i t i ng. S c r e e n i n g and g e n e r a t i o n may o f t e n b e c o n s i d e r e d as a c o m p l e x , repeated a c t i v i t y ; i.e., a f t e r each s c r e e n i n g t h e r e d u c e d number of alternatives is increased a g a i n by

iii) the i t e r a t i o n w i t h i n the stage

iv) the a v a i l a b i l i t y of qualified and t r a i n e d p e r s o n n e l who can make use of quantitative systemic approaches

allowing for more d e t a i l description of alternatives.

in

the

In summary, screening techniques may range anywhere b e t w e e n " r u l e o f thumb" and " f o r m a l o p t i m i z a t i o n , " depending on t h e t y p e of problem and the level of r a n k i ng screening at wh i c h procedures a r e used.

decisions) : dynamic (time dependent); non-deterministic, w i t h h i g h e l e m e n t s o f r i s k and h a v i ng uncertainties; and d i s t r i b u t e d parameters

v)

v a r i a b i l i t y of portions of the system (problem), which g e t s i n t h e way o f q u a n t i t a t i v e m o d e l i n g

4.8

Use of hierarchical analysis in plan formulation and screening alternatives

A necessary c o n d i t i o n for the successful use of systems methodologies f o r water resources planning i s the a b i l i t y t o develop a (mathemat i c a 1 ) model that is r e s p o n s i v e t o (and a c c o u n t s f o r ) t h e v a r i o u s o b j e c t i v e s , c o n s t r a i n t s , and input-output casual r e l a t i o n s h i p s of t h e system t h a t i s b e i n g modeled. Only i f t h i s c o n d i t i o n i s met w i l l the results of the model b e m e a n i n g f u l and i m p l e m e n t a b l e . The hierarchical approach p o s s e s s e s many i m p o r t a n t a t t r i b u t e s f o r b o t h m o d e l i n g and o p t i m i z a t i o n . The h i e r a r c h i c a l a p p r o a c h i s , i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , a p h i l o s o p h y and n o t a r i g i d methodology. This philosophy recognizes t h a t water resources s y s t e m s have most o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Haimes 1977) :

Such c o m p l e x i t y s u g g e s t s that simple systems methodologies are l i k e l y t o f a l l short of successfully modeling and optimizing water r e s o u r c e s systems w i t h t h e above characteristics. The c o n c e p t o f t h e h i e r a r c h i c a l approach I S based on the decomposition of large-scale and complex s y s t e m s and t h e s u b s e q u e n t modeling of the system into IIi n d e p e n d e n t " subsystems. This d e c e n t r a l i z e d a p p r o a c h , by u t i l i z i n g t h e concepts of l e v e l s , s t r a t a , and layers, e n a b l e s t h e systems a n a l y s t to assess and comprehend the behavior of t h e subsystems a t a lower level and t o t r a n s m i t the information obtained to fewer subsystems a t a h i g h e r l e v e l . I n applying the hierarchical approach to the modeling and optimization of water resources systems, combinations o f several hierarchical structures are available t o the analyst. These c o m b i n a t i o n s a r e based on f o u r m a j o r descriptions (decompos i t i o n s ) , name 1 y :

i)

multiple noncommensurable o b j e c t i v e s as w e l l as m u l t i p l e decision-makers

(1)

tempor a 1

ii)

a l a r g e number o f v a r i a b l e s parameters

and

( 2 ) phys i c a 1 - h y d r o l o g i c a l

i i i) a

large number of components ( s u b s y s t e m s )

coupled

(3)

political-geographical

(4) g o a l - o r i e n t e d o r f u n c t i o n a l
iv) causa 1 relationships that are nonlinear (of ten a combination of continuous, discrete, and 0 - 1

input-output

(1) Temporal d e s c r i p t i o n

p.lanning

time

horizon

for

-49-

w a t e r s u p p l y p r o j e c t s o f t e n spans 30-50 y e a r s . I n t o t h i s long-term planning i s usually imbedded an i n t e r m e d i a t e term o f 10-15 y e a r s , o f ten r e f er r e d to as planning-for-operation, f o l l o w e d by Clearly, a s h o r t t e r m o f 2-5 y e a r s . the short-, intermediate-, and 1 ong- t e r m p 1 ans have to be. c o m p a t i b l e w i t h e a c h o t h e r and t h u s coordinated, since they r e l a t e t o t h e same system. To i l l u s t r a t e , p l a n n i n g h o r i z o n s o f water r e s o u r c e s f o r c r o p and r e l a t e d l a n d u s e c a n b e o f t h e o r d e r o f 1-2 y e a r s . tiowever, when a c r o p has been s e l e c t e d and the water f o r i t s seasonal growth has been a l l o c a t e d , horizons o f decisions with respect to the periodic irrigation within the season a r e o f t h e o r d e r o f weeks o r days. (2) description Physical-hydrological

pattern are available in the literature, s u c h as demand and supply models and models for hydroelectric power generation, i r r i g a t i o n , i n d u s t r i a l and m u n i c i p a l use, r e c r e a t i o n , e t c .

4.9

Use of analysis

multiobjective

A river bas i n is, by a hydrologically definition, self-contained region, separated f r o m a d j a c e n t b a s i n s by r i d g e s o r other topographical d i v i d e r s . Often a w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management s y s t e m covers a r e g i o n c o n s i s t i n g o f a complex o f several f i v e r basins. Thus, a r e g i o n c a n be d i v i d e d i n t o several subregions, f u r t h e r divided into several r i v e r basins, and further divided into several subbasins.

A recent trend in systems a n a l y s i s has b e e n t o u s e m o d e l s t h a t have more than one objective is especially function. This important i n the planning o f river basins, where t h e r e t e n d t o be conf 1 i c t i n g and severa 1 noncommensurable objectives. for example, o n e may w a n t t o m a x i m i z e b o t h economic e f f i c i e n c y , w h i c h i s measured i n monetary u n i t s , and environmental quality, which is measured i n units of pollutant concentration. Traditionally, only one o b j e c t i v e (economic e f f i c i e n c y ) has been c o n s i d e r e d , w i t h t h e o t h e r objectives being included e i t h e r as constraints or as b e i n g somehow commensurate with the primary o b j e c t iv e . However, society is p l a c i n g an i n c r e a s i n g i m p o r t a n c e o n nonpecuniary objectives that are d i f f i c u l t t o quantify monetarily.
Adopting a multiobjective analysis philosophy i n t h i s stage o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s (as w e l l a s in the other stages) adds t o t h e s y s t e m i c and q u a n t i t a t i v e setup. Cost-benefit a n a l ys i s has t r a d i t i o n a l l y dominated b o t h Stage 3 and S t a g e 4. I t can be e a s i l y demons t r a t ed that cost-benefit analysis i s a special case (a simp1 i f i e d case) of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e i n which a n a l y s i s ; i t i s t h e case a1 1 objectives have been commensurated and augmented i n t e r m s o f b e n e f i t s and c o s t s . Fundamental t o multiobjective analysis i s the Pareto optimum, which is also known as the so 1 u t i on. noninferior Qualitatively, a noninferior s o l u t i o n o f a m u l t i o b j e c t i v e problem i s one w h e r e any improvement of one o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n can be achieved o n l y a t t h e expense o f d e g r a d i n g another.

(3)
description

Political-geographical

Regional water resources systems o f t e n come under a v a r i e t y o f geographically defined governing agencies--city, county, and s t a t e , f o r instance. Modeling f o r water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management may consider a political-geographical des.cription as a c r i t e r i o n f o r decomposing t h e r e g i o n a l area i n t o subregions.

(4) G o a l - o r i e n t e d o r f u n c t i o n a l description
Most w a t e r r e s o u r c e s systems have been a n a l y z e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r economic and f u n c t i o n a l g o a l s . Var i ous models following this

-50-

Mathematical modeling and systems e n g i n e e r i n g s h o u l d n o t be a substitute for, but rather tools of, the decision-making process. They can be v e r y v a l u a b l e i n generating possible outcomes under c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s and a s s u m p t i o n s . They are capable of generating a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s and p l a n s t h a t under spec i f i c are " o p t i ma 1 I ' assumptions and criteria. In m u l t i o b j e c t i v e planning, where t h e concept o f o p t i r n a l i t y i s expanded into Pareto optirnality, the generation o f the various model Pareto optimal plans can be invaluable i n identifying specific c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a t t r i b u t e s o f a b a s i n ' s p l a n n i n g s u b a r e a as w e l l as in quantifying the complex i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e many components i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . Once the limitations of the mathematical mode 1 s under consideration are i d e n t i f i e d and q u a n t i f i e d , t h e y c a n b e used v e r y e f f e c t i v e l y as s i m u l a t i o n models t o answer "what i f " type questions. The e x p e r i e n c e g a i n e d u s i n g the surrogate worth trade-off (SWT) method r e i n f o r c e s the need for i n t e g r a t i n g m a t h e m a t i c a l models and s i m u l a t i o n models t o i m p r o v e t h e e f f i c a c y o f t h e p l a n n i n g process. The a p p l i c a t i o n o f the SWT method t o v a r i o u s problems w i t h multiobjective functions can be extended t o the minimization of risk, sensitivity, irreversibility, and uncertainty associated w i t h m a t h e m a t i c a l models j o i n t l y w i t h t h e minimization of the model's objective function, in a mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e framework. The Pareto optimal s o l u t i o n s and - t h e associated trade-off values help the d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s s e l e c t an a c c e p t a b l e level of assurance and the corresponding cost. I n o t h e r words, d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s c a n make known t h e i r preferences w i t h respect t o the 1 eve 1 of assurance against in the model I s uncertainties p r e d i c t i o n a t t h e expense o f a degradation (reduction) in the model's optimal solution. The s u b j e c t o f multiobjective analysis should be explicitly d i s c u s s e d a t each s t e p of the

planning p r o c e s s because o f its central role in water resource i f n o t a l l , water planning. Host, r e s o u r c e s systems a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d by multiple objectives, multiple mu1 t ip l e decision-makers, and constituencies. I n f o r m u l a t i n g and screening a l t e r n a t i v e plans, these m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e s , which a r e o f t e n noncommensurable and may be i n c o n f l i c t and i n c o m p e t i t i o n , m u s t be given e x p l i c i t and quantitative consideration (to the extent possible). For example, increasing agricultural production commonly leads t o a higher l e v e l o f sheet e r o s i o n and s e d i m e n t a t i o n ; or the o p t i m a l use o f r e s e r v o i r s f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l p u r p o s e s may b e a c h i e v e d a t t h e expense o f r e d u c i n g hydro-power g e n e r a t i o n (as a p p l i c a b l e ) , e t c . -MulQob.jective analysis i n t h i s c o n t e x t s h o u l d b e v i e w e d n o t o n l y as a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l a. . roach b u t a l s o pp as a p h i l o s o p h y . Trade-offs a r e a inherent p a r t of neqotiation, of %chi nq consensus, and of -compromise s o l u t i u . Thus, t h e use of multiobjective and t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s i n t h e development o f f i n a l p l a n r e s u l t s can be a n a t u r a l s t e p i n t h i s phase. This i s particularly t r u e when t h e a n a l y s t s , p l a n n e r s , and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s a r e c o g n i z a n t o f the efficacy, attributes, and limitations of mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e analysis.

Numerous methodologies for mu 1 t i o b j e c t i v e optimization (analysis) have been d e v e l o p e d i n t h e l a s t decade--many of them in conjunct ion with water resource p l a n n i n g and management. Several b o o k s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o d a y on t h e use of multiple objectives in water r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g and management. The r o l e of multiobjective analysis i s particularly c r i t i c a l i n t h e addressing nonstructural plans, i n which t h e cost, benefits, and r i s k s cannot be e a s i l y q u a n t i f i e d i n m o n e t a r y t e r m s as t h e y can i n more structured plans. Furthermore, as environmental and other s o c i o e c o n o m i c a s p e c t s d o m i n a t e and influence policy decisions, the importance and needs of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s become more

-51and more c r i t i c a l and e v i d e n t . An of the compl ex 1 y examp 1 e i n t e r r e l a t e d o b j e c t i v e s 3 a t must b e dealt= f o u n d i n t h e Maumee - P l a n n i n g S t u d y - ( s e e Case S t u d y 4) , in which the following six o b j e c t i v e s were included in the mathematical model i n g and :enhancement focusing pollution of on water quality, poi nt-source A recent development of multiobjective analysis i s i t s use i n a man-machine i n t e r a c t i v e mode, through .decision support syst=.Sf;' (DSSs) I n Israel, for example, a no e = D - S fhas S screening. In this DSS, all are s u b j ec t e d to e x a m i n a t i o n i n t e r m s o f 38 c r i t e r i a t h a t h a v e an overall goal of a s s e s s i n g a minimum-damage f u n c t i o n for d e l a y i ng a project's c o n s t r u c t i on. Successful experimentations with gam i ng s i m u l a t i o n h a v e been r e a l i z e d , in which p a r t o f t h e s i m u l a t i o n of a human natural-resources engineering-hardware system is executed "automatical l y " by computer, while t h e human p a r t i s c a r r i e d o u t by people p l a y i n g r o l e s . I t i s sometimes p o s s i b l e t o g e t the real-life decision-makers t o play their own r o l e s . I n t h i s era of i n c r e a s i ng avai l a b i 1 it y of computers, a DSS m i g h t be a v e r y promising concept t h a t c o u l d h e l p d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t o more c l e a r l y see t h e consequences o f t h e i r s u b j e c t i v e preferences.

&

reduct ion of eros ion, sedimentation, and p h o s p h o r u s from nonpoint sources enhancement of opportunities recreational

protection of w i l d l i f e habitat

% A & .r e d u c t i o n o f f l o o d damage protection of agricultural

WCt0k;Lt

land

For most water resources systems (and many o t h e r systems as w e l l ) , d e c i s i o n s a r e n o t made b y a single individual b u t r a t h e r by groups o f i n d i v i d u a l s . These may b e l e g i s l a t i v e bodies, the board o f directors of a water district, a state o f f i c i a l , etc. I n e v e r y case, each member o f t h e g r o u p has a personal view o f t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e , i m p o r t a n c e , and r e l a t i v e v a l u e o f the various objectives being considered. F u r t hermor e, each decision-maker may have a c o n s t i t u e n c y t o whom he o r she i s responsible. T h i s means t h a t t h e decision-maker must integrate the relative i n f l u e n c e and v i e w s o f t h e segments o f t h i s c o n s t i t u e n c y into the evaluation o f the merits of the alternatives. The critical influence of these decision-makers and s t a k e h o l d e r s m u s t be r e c o g n i z e d throughout t h e p l a n n i n g process. I n t h i s handbook, a d i s t i n c t i o n should be made between two aspects-- ( i ) t h e needs, i m p o r t a n c e , and efficacy of multiobjective a n a l y s i s and ( i i ) t h e m e t h o d o l o g i e s and techniques of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e analysis. O b v i o u s l y our a t t e n t i o n s h o u l d f o c u s on t h e f o r m e r , and n o t on the l a t t e r .

To s um UP 9 real-world dec i s i on-mak_i_n_.,Erpcesses-are, , . a 1 ways associated m u 1 t i o b i ec t i2-L wi-th -ms-.. The m o s t i m p o r t a n t t a s k s of a n a l y s t s who cope with the c o n d u c t of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s i s t o make t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s aware t h a t they are a c t u a l l y doing t h a t kind of analysis, implicitly, in t h e i r minds. Thus, i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o p u t some o r d e r i n t h e i r way o f because a m a t h e m 2 i t i g l t h i nk i ng, ; ~ model can never be developed to : ~ -~ ~.~ ~ . -~~ r eP a c e Lhe-deci s i p n -mak_er' s.way_- o i , ---. ; h a n d l i n g- m u l t - i... b- ..c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i o n o je : ' ;rob1 ems. , . I ~~

_^__.

----

--'--

4.10

References

Goicoechea, A., D. Hansen, L. Duckstein. 1982. Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Decisision Analysis with E n g i n e e r i n g and Business A p p l i c a t i o n s . Wiley, New Y o r k .

-52-

Haimes, Y.Y. 1977. Hierarchical Anal yses o f Water Resources and Systems: Model i ng Optimization of Large-scale Systems. M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k . Y.Y. 1981. Risk-benefit Haimes, analysis in a multiobjective framework. In R i sk/Benef i t Analysis in Water Resources Y.Y. P l a n n i n g and Management, Haimes, (ed.) Plenum, New York 89-122. and London, pp.

Y.Y., Hairnes, (eds.) Analysis American Engineers,

1984.

A 1 lee, Multiobjective i n Water R e s o u r c e s . of Civi 1 Society New Y o r k .

and

D.J.

U.S.

OTA--U.S. Office of Technology Assessment. 1982. Use of Models for Water Resources Management, Planning and P o l i c y . OTA. Washington,D.C.

5. D e v e l o p m e n t o f final study results

I n S t a g e 4, t h e p l a n n i n g team, following extensive discussion, negotiation, and p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , s e l e c t s a p l a n and recommends its adoption t o higher- level a u t h o r i t y . These r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e made o n l y a f t e r the completion of S t a g e 3, during which t h e team (i) has s u c c e s s f u l l y conducted a f e a s i b i l i t y study t o evaluate the f i n a n c i a l , political, legal-regulatory, organizational, and personne 1 ramifications of t h e proposed p l a n and its impacts, (i i) has identified, quantified, and evaluated a l l p e r t i n e n t elements o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the plan as part of the eva 1 u a t i o n mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e t r a d e - o f f and o p t i m i z a t i o n a c t i v i t y , and ( i i i ) has developed operational rules within a planning-for -operation study f o r a1 1 p e r t i n e n t p r o j e c t ( s ) t h a t have been d e v e l o p e d as p a r t o f the o v e r a l l plan.

made s c r e e n i n g s a t Stage 3 a r e without the d e t a i l e d analyses t h a t a r e commonly c o n d u c t e d a t S t a g e 4. However, from a p r a c t i c a l v i e w p o i n t and g i v e n t h e l i m i t e d a v a i l a b l e t i m e and r e s o u r c e s , t h e p r o p o s e d sequence i s recommended o f S t a g e s 3 and 4 here. The p l a n n e r s h o u l d a l s o k e e p i n m i n d t h a t S t a g e 4 may be d i r e c t l y i n terms o f c o u p l e d w i t h Stage 2 d a t a d e v e l o p m e n t and improvement. Furthermore, a t Stage 4 t h e p l a n n e r s may f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o r e q u e s t a p r o j e c t d e s i g n ( S t a g e 5) i n o r d e r t o generate more-accurate cost f u n c t i o n s of candidate s t r u c t u r e s o r o t h e r measures that are being contemplated. Note t h a t i n c e r t a i n studies, o n l y one p l a n may be selected, and a d e t a i l e d p r o j e c t c o n f i g u r a t i o n would be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h a t p l a n alone. However, u n d e r d i f f e r e n t circumstances, more t h a n one plan may b e s e l e c t e d and s u b s e q u e n t l y more t h a n one p r o j e c t c o n f i g u r a t i o n would be i n o r d e r . Stage 3 amounts to a p r e l i m i n a r y s c r e e n i n g , w h i l e Stage 4 i s intended t o lead the p r o j e c t very close to its final recommended c o n f i g u r a t i o n (or t h e e q u i v a l e n t of t h i s a t another l e v e l o f p l a n n i n g ) . Because o f t h i s , S t a g e 4 is likely t o r e q u i r e t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f more r e s o u r c e s and t h e u s e of more s o p h i s t i c a t e d techniques, and t h e e n t i r e p r o c e s s i s l i k e l y t o b e more thoroughly executed. Resu 1 t s obtained i n S t a g e 4 may s u g g e s t t h e need f o r a repetition of some portions of S t a g e 3 (an i t e r a t i v e l o o p ) , w i t h perhaps the generation of one or more add i t i ona 1 alternatives. is D u r i n g S t a g e 4, t h e p r o j e c t analyzed in detail, including the g e n e r a t i o n o f one o r more s u i t a b l e w i l l integrated models, which r e q u i r e the f o l l o w i n g steps:

5.1 The relationship Stages 3 and 4

betwem

As m e n t i o n e d p r e v i o u s l y , there e x i s t s a c e r t a i n o v e r l a p between S t a g e s 3 and 4 o f the p l a n n i n g process. I n a r e a l sense, t h e r e i s a logical c o n t i n u u m between the screening o f p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f f i n a l s t u d y resul ts.

More s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e p r o c e s s d e s i g n i ng, and of p l ann i ng, o p e r a t i n g water resources p r o j e c t s lends itself to a hierarchical structure of subsystems as w e l l as decisions. I t i s o f t e n common t h a t higher-order and more global decisions d i c t a t e and influence lower-level and more local or p a r o c h i a l d e c i s i o n s , and v i c e - v e r s a . Yet, a t Stage 3 o f the planning process, an a t t e m p t i s made a t executing high-level planning or without a detailed design planning-for-operation a n a l ys i s . Consequently, the p r e l i m i nary

-54-

a.

quantitative definition v a r i a b l e s and t e r m s quantification ( t o the possible) of a l l f i n a l

of

all

fr

b.

extent

C.

objectives - constraints - input-output relationships - m e a s u r e s - - s t r u c t u r a l and nonstructural i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and e v a l u t i o n o f a v a i l a b l e e x i s t i n g m o d e l s and submodel s that might be c a n d i d a t e s f o r use i n Stage 4 o f the planning process evaluation of the data base needed f o r s t e p c above needed c o n s t r u c t i o n o f new submodel s models and

t h e s c r e e n ng r e s u l t s f r o m S t a g e where a l a r g e number o f p o o r l y d e f ned a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s were cons d e r e d (The term p o o r l y de i n e d r e f e r s t o t h e f u z z i ness f p r o j e c t dimensions, u n c e r t a i n t y about the time o f commissioning, and vagueness concerning other operational p r o p e r t ies)

3,

additional endogenous and exogenous system d a t a , b u i l d i n g on t h e d a t a t h a t were just sufficiently detailed and accurate t o permit the screening a t Stage 3 .

d.

B J

Output from Stage 4 needed for feasibility study

e.

f.

integration of newly developed and submodels with mode 1 s e x i s t i n g models, as a p p r o p r i a t e g e n e r a t i o n o f needed p r o j e c t i o n s model t e s t i n g , c a l i b r a t i o n , v a l i d a t i o n , as a p p r o p r i a t e and

g. h.

The f i n a l r e s u l t o f t h i s stage presumably leads- t o an " o p t i m a l " plan, better known as t h e m o s t preferred or the least compromised plan. The p l a n n i n g and pol icy option deve 1 oped through the use o f m o d e l s and t h e i r associated trade-offs and impacts are discussed i n d e t a i l at this stage. This i s done with the participation of all concerned decision-makers, stake-holders, constituencies, and a g e n c i e s .

5.2 input to and output from Stage 4

The e s s e n t i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s that t a k e p l a c e between S t a g e 4 and t h e other stages o f the planning process will be summarized in t h i s section:

A p r o j e c t f e a s i b i l i t y study is a process t h a t s u b j e c t s the p r o j e c t and i t s v a r i o u s components t o a s e t of pre-selected qualifiction, The standards, and c r i t e r ia. p r o j e c t and i t s components must meet t h e s e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n o r d e r t o b e d e s i g n a t e d as " f e a s i b l e . " Such standards and criteria generally i nc 1 ude t e c h n i ca 1 economic, legal-regulatory, and envi ronmental aspects. Project f e a s i b i l i t y does n o t include, i n general, f i n a n c i a l , organizational, or institutional feasibility. Rather, the feasibility study provides the basis upon which financial arrangements ( e .g funding sources, cost-sharing, o r g a n i z a t i ona 1 bonds, etc) , arrangements (e g., h i r i ng of personnel, administrative structure, levels of responsibilities, etc.), or institutional arrangements (e.g. agency r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , i n t e r a g e n c y e t c .) can be c o o r d i na t i on, established i n the future. The feasibility study should also include:

A ) Input to Stage 4
Stage 4 requires the f o l l o w i n g inputs: at least

identification of a selected project--the best alternative plan--and setting the main project parameters t o j u s t i f y and s u p p o r t t h e p r o j e c t . generation of a project

-55-

feasibility statement. The of feasibility--in"statement c l u d i n g t e c h n i c a l , economic, and environmental f e a s i b i l i t y - - o f t e n does n o t include financial f e a s i b i l i t y recommendations w i t h regard t o organizational and institutional aspects o f the project.

C)

Output from Stage 4 needed project study , etc.).

for

planners continually discover d u r i n g l a t e r stages t h a t a d d i t i o n a l information i s needed and some r e s p o n s i v e a c t i o n must b e t a k e n . A t one e x t r e m e , a d a t a c o l l e c t i o n p r o c e s s m i g h t be i n i t i a t e d a t this A t t h e o t h e r extreme, an stage. a r t i f i c i a l o r s y n t h e t i c d a t a base might be generated from o t h e r similar sources h a v i ng characteristics ( r e g i ona 1 , s t r u c t u r a l , socioeconomic, e t c . ) . I n g e n e r a l , d a t a a r e needed i n more d e t a i l i n Stage 4 t h a n i n Stage 3. In addition, data c o l l e c t e d i n S t a g e 2 and n o t u s e d i n S t a g e 3 o f t e n become c r i t i c a l l y This is important i n S t a g e 4. p a r t i c u l a r l y true f o r determination of a specific s i t e selection or in t h e e v a l u a t i o n of s e c o n d a r y and t e r t i a r y socioeconomic e f f e c t s t h a t are i m p l i e d by a s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t selection.

The o u t p u t f r o m S t a g e 4 makes possible the f i n a l design o f t h e project. It i nc 1 udes the specification of a l l parameters needed f o r t h e d e s i g n , such as the q u a n t i t y o f w a t e r t o be r e l e a s e d , t h e demand as f u n c t i o n o f t i m e , and the location and s i zes of reservoirs, canals, c o n d u i t s , and the l i k e . The o u t p u t a l s o p r o v i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n on o p e r a t i o n a l rules and u s u a l l y i d e n t i f i e s and a s s e s s e s the large-scale impacts a1 1 r e s u l t i n g from t h e p r o j e c t . I t does n o t e n t a i l a d e t a i l e d d e s i g n of the required structures, a l t h o u g h t h e c o s t e s t i m a t e s and t h e i r dimensions s h o u l d b e known roughly. Therefore the output i nc 1 udes:

* * *

f i n a l s p e c i f i c a t i o n of the project parameters p r o p e r t i es final estimate of commissioning s t a t e

main and

project

A t Stage 4 o f the planning process, a1 1 information sources--agencies at all levels, civic groups, and private s o u r c e s - - m u s t b e used i n o r d e r to have access t o t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a . Processing data from d i f f e r e n t data banks t h r o u g h t h e use o f computer facilities i s becoming t h e r u l e rather than t h e exception. Most importantly, assumptions about conjectural data must b e w e l l explained, justified, and documented.
The most c r i t i c a l d a t a needs a t t h i s stage concern t h e f i n a n c i a l , political, legal-regulatory, organizational, and personnel aspects.

final estimate of project impacts (costs, b e n e f i t s , r i s k s , t r a d e - o f f s , e t c . ) i n c l u d i n g cash f l o w and r e t u r n e s t i m a t e s recommendation f o r p r o j e c t

>k

fa) Financial
5.3

Sources, quality categories of Stage needs

and data

Although Stage 2 of the planning process--data collection and p r o c e s s i n g - - h a s been i d e n t i f i e d as t h e s t a g e d u r i n g w h i c h d a t a a c t i v i t i e s are emphasized, the

When sever a 1 1 eve1 s of government a r e i n v o l v e d , knowledge of t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f funds from e a c h l e v e l o f g o v e r n m e n t i s needed. federal, I n t h e U . S . , f o r example, state, local, and o f t e n r e g i o n a l f u n d i n g s may b e r e q u i r e d o r are available. Furthermore, information on approaches to

-56-

c o s t - s h a r i n g and revenue-sharing and t h e i r i m p a c t o n t h e p l a n c o u l d be e s s e n t i a l to the ultimate success o f t h e p l a n implementation. Often, t h e r e a r e p l a n s f o r one level of g o v e r n m e n t (e.g., s t a t e ) t h a t a r e mandated b y a n o t h e r level of government (e.g.. federal). ''Who s h o u l d pay f o r w h a t ? " is a and challenging q u e s t i on, i n f o r m a t i o n o n r e l a t e d and r e l e v a n t precedence m i g h t be v e r y h e l p f u l .

counties, districts, and r e g i o n a l agencies. The p l a n n e r s , i n their s e l e c t i o n of t h e f i n a l p l a n , must be cognizant of the mutual imp1 i c a t i o n s and impacts between these m u t l i r e g u l a t o r y frameworks and t h e s e l e c t e d p l a n a s such. For example, differences in zoning codes among a d j a c e n t d i s t r i c t s may prove t o b e a major impediment to a n i m p o r t a n t component o f t h e p l a n .

I d i Organizational lbl Political

P l t h o u c h knowledge about a or bas i n ' s h y d r o 1 o g y , re; i on'.s socioeconomic gecmsr p h c 1 ogy d e v e i o p r n e n t , and a m y r i a d o f other imperative factors seen:: ng 1 y dominate t h e process of water it i s often resources planning, PO: i t i c a l knowledge--abow? the po!itical climate, the p o l i t i c a l w i l i t o support a plan, and t h e political c o a l i t i o n s t h a t can b e formed--that i s e s s e n t i a l t o the of failure of a plan. success P o l i t i c a l w i l l i s essential for the s u p p o r t o f a p l a n , a n d k n o w i n g how to marshal such p o l i t i c a l w i l l s h o u ! d b e p a r t o f t h e agenda o f t h e plannins t e a r . Because a s e l e c t c ~ o u p can b i c l c k a pian, a much larger consersdc amsng t h e true stake-holders, i n f l u e n t i a l groups, and a f f e c t e d p a r t i e s should be a sought t o r e a l i z e t h e success of plan. UndeTstanding t h e p o l i t i c a l environment and a p p r e c i a t i n g t h e positive effect of the consensus-building process w i t h i n t h e p o l i t i c a l system s h o u l d be h i g h o r t h e p l a n n i n s agenda. The v a r i ous levels of government--local, s t a t e , r e g i o n a l , and f e d e r a l - - n e e d t o develop the appropr i a t e organization and adm i n i s t r a t i v e st ructbre to exercise the authority for the management o f t h e w a t e r resources project provided by the legal-reguiatory framework. The planners should understanding t h a t the implementation o f their plan r e q u i r e s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s u c h an appropriate organizational and administrative structure. Thus, information collected on the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l aspect a t t h i s s t a g e of the p l a n n i n g process can p r o v e to all t o be extremely beneficial concerned p a r t i e s . In particular, when t h e p l a n n e r s c o n s i d e r the h i e r a r c h i ca 1 decision-making s t r u c t u r e w i t h i n which the p l a n i s developed, t h e i r knowledge a b o u t the centralized and/or responsibilities d e c e n t r a l i zed among t h e v a r i o u s p a r t i e s c a n o n l y be h e l p f u l t o the p l a n n i n g process.

l e ) Personnel
Comprehensive p l a n n i n g f o r a r i v e r b a s i n or o t h e r w a t e r r e s o u r c e n e c e s s i t a t e s comprehensive p l a n n i n g for qilai i f i e d and trained personnel. P a s t e x p e r i e n c e shows t h a t one way t o e n s u r e a more harmonious implementation of the p l a n i s t o make e a r l y p r e p a r a t i o n to f i l l the for qualified staff v a r i e t y o f needed p o s i t i o n s , both

/ c l Legal - Re_ou/atory

Knor;ledge o f t h e v a r i o u s iegal and r e g u l a t o r y s y s t e m s t h a t a f f e c t and a r e a f f e c t e d b y a p l a n i s needed. Cons i d e r the multi regulatory frameworks associated w i t h a l o c a l government with i t s various municipalities,

-57-

scientific-technical (e.g., eng i n e e r s , hydrologists, soil-scientists, mode 1 e r s and computer analysts, agronomists, and etc.) admi n i s t r a t i v e - 1 ega 1 (e.g., managers, 1 awyer s , economists, planners, clerks, i t takes etc.). The f a c t that c o n s i d e r a b l e e f f o r t t o p r e p a r e an adequate staff requires that i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f such p e r s o n n e l be sought by t h e planners a t t h i s stage o f the planning process. A carefully p l a n n e d t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m must b e proposed as p a r t o f the t o t a l package.

5.4

The role of modeling, simulation and optimization

An i m p o r t a n t r e q u i s i t e f o r the v i a b l e u s e of m o d e l s i n t h e p l a n n i n g process i s t h e p e r c e p t i o n (by t h e p l a n n e r s and t h e p u b l i c ) of their credibility (see a l s o S e c t i o n 4 . 4 ) . The a s s u r a n c e t h a t model r e s u l t s a r e r e l i a b l e i s i m p e r a t i v e i n S t a g e 4. I f t h e models s u f f e r s from f u z z i n e s s 3, t h i s w i l l n o t as in Stage adversely a f f e c t t h e soundness of the f i n a l p r o j e c t s e l e c t i o n as i f t h i s occurs i n Stage 4. Most importantly, t h e e n t i r e s t u d y can lose the participatory support of the concerned a g e n c i e s and t h e p u b l i c i f t h e m o d e l s and p r o c e d u r e s u s e d a r e p e r c e i v e d as lacking i n credibility and scientific grounding.

S i m p l e and a g g r e g a t e models a r e 3. Thus, in used in Stage t r a d i n g - o f f between a c c u r a c y o n t h e one hand and computational f e a s i b i l i t y . on the other, the planner often tips the balance toward t h e latter in order to generate fast, reasonable, and plausible results. I n S t a g e 4, however, t h e b a l a n c e s h o u l d b e moved i n f a v o u r a g r e a t a c c u r a c y and more detai 1. Furthermore, Stage 4 necess i t a t e s the use of a1 1 a v a i l a b l e s y s t e m a t i c procedures o f systems a n a l y s i s i n o r d e r t o r e f i n e , augment, and adopt the models employed. Some s p e c i f i c s u g g e s t i o n s a b o u t how t o do t h e s e f o l l o w : To r e f i n e : Modify and/ or delete w ithout chang i n g structure. coefficients constraints the bas i c

An i n t e g r a t e d u s e o f s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n has p r o v e n t o b e most e f f e c t i v e i n many s t u d i e s and has become t h e preferred modus of systems analysis operand i practitioners. Depending on the spec i f i c needs of a model, o p t i m i z a t i o n and simulation are related i n one o f the following ways :
i) O p t i m i z a t i o n may b e f o l l o w e d simulation. by

i i ) O p t i m i z a t i o n may b e i n c l u d e d simulation.

in

i i ) S i m u l a t i o n may b e used f o r model quantification (primarily the quantification of objective functions) and followed by optimization. v) S i m u l a t i o n may b e u s e d as a search technique f o r i d e n t i f y i n g a n optimum.

To augment: Use o t h e r m o d e l s . For example, use s i m u l a t i o n t o t e s t and v e r i f y the results of optimization. The o t h e r m o d e l s may now i n c l u d e a s p e c t s not previously considered explicitly, s u c h as a d e t a i l e d modeling o f t h e o p e r a t i o n , which appeared i n a s i m p l i f i e d f o r m earlier. To a d o p t : Use m o d e l s d e v e l o p e d b y others, o r compare r e s u l t s w i t h those generated b y o t h e r s .

The u s e o f s i m u l a t i o n as a search technique o f t e n occurs in complex p r o b l e m s w i t h a l a r g e number of a l t e r n a t i v e s and w i t h limited a v a i l a b l e computing f a c i l i t i e s . The e x c l u s i v e use o f optimization (in the generation of operational rules) of ten requi r e s that the stochasticity i s dealt with i n an a p p r o x i m a t e way. T h i s p r o b l e m may be a l l e v i a t e d by the use of stochastic hydrology, I .e.,

-58-

on

s i m u l a t i o n o f system o p e r a t i o n b a s e d s y n t h e t i c hydrology and o t h e r a r t i f i c i a l l y generated data.

5.5 Risk and uncertainty

The f a c t t h a t w a t e r resources systems--public and private--are planned, designed, constructed, operated, and modified under conditions of r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y that the numerous necess i t a t e s e l e m e n t s o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y be considered throughout the planning p r o c e s s , and p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g t h e development o f f i n a l s t u d y r e s u l t s . Risk i s associated w i t h the p o s s i b i l i t y o f s u f f e r i n g harm, l o s s , danger, f a i l u r e , o r o t h e r adverse e f f e c t s as a r e s u l t o f t a k i n g a n I t a c t i o n o r a sequence o f a c t i o n s . c o n s i s t s o f t h e f o l l o w i n g two b a s i c elements: ( i ) magnitude o f t h e r i s k and (ii) the likelihood it w i l l cause harm or a d v e r s e e f f e c t s . To d e s c r i b e a r i s k y s i t u a t i o n , we m u s t t h e r e f o r e adequately d e s c r i b e these two b a s i c e l e m e n t s . The U.S. Water Resources t o u n c i 1 (1 980) i d e n t i f i e s two m a j o r s o u r c e s o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y :

objective techniques. If no such historical data base exists, the probability random f u t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n of events can be described the based u p 0 s u b j e c t iv e 1 y , and best available insight judgment. to I t is often usef u1 distinguish among t h e f o l ow i ng three risk-related situations that reflect the different leve s of risk information available for assessment and management:
risk situations--situations in w h i c h t h e p o t e n t i a l outcome can by reasonabl y be d e s c r i bed well-known probability distributions.

imprecision situations-situations having potential o u tcomes that cannot be in terms of descr i bed o b j e c t i v e l y known probability distributions, b u t w h i c h c a n be e s t i ma t e d by s u b j e c t i ve probabi 1 i t i e s uncertainty situations-situations i n which p o t e n t i a l outcomes c a n n o t be d e s c r i b e d in terms of objectively cr subjectively known p r o b a b i l i t y distributions These a r e n o t m e r e l y a b s t r a c t definitions; r a t h e r , each s i t u a t i o n requires the use of different for approaches and tool s quantifiction or evaluation purposes. The total risk issue is addressed t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f r i s k assessment and management. To perform t h e complete process o f r i s k assessment f o r a p a r t i c u l a r p r o b l e m , the f o l l o w i n g t a s k s need t o be c a r r i e d o u t (Haimes 1981) : 1)

1.

R i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y a r i s e from measurement e r r o r s and from t h e of underlying variability complex natural, social, and. economic s i t u a t i o n s . If the a n a l y s t i s u n c e r t a i n because t h e data are imperfect or the a n a l y t i c a l t o o l s crude, t h e p l a n is subject to measurement errors, and t h e s e o b v i o u s l y c a n be m i n i m i z e d by improved d a t a and r e f i n e d a n a l y t i c t e c h n i q u e s . Some future demographic, hydrologic, and econom i c , meteorological events are essentially unpredictable because they are subject to random i n f l u e n c e s . The a n a l y s t whether the must dec i de randomness c a n b e d e s c r i b e d by some p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n . I f there i s a h i s t o r i c a l data base t h a t i s applicable t o the future, d i s t r i b u t i o n s can be described or approximated by

2.

Risk identification, which involves i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the nature, types, and s o u r c e s o f r i s k s and u n c e r t a i n t i e s . In general, t h e major types o f risks are financial, health-related, environmental,

-59-

technical, and techno o g i c a l and (e.g., performance The end supportabi 1 i ty) is a product of t h i s task risky complete d e s c r i p t i o n o f e v e n t s and e l e m e n t s o f maj o r their concern along wi-th causa t i v e and factors mechanisms.

the overa 1 1 dec i s on-mak i ng process--wh i ch is the mperat i v e p r e m i se assumed h e r e . I t IS i n s t r u c t ve to articulate, at t h i s s age, the d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p r o c e s s o f risk assessment and the m e t h o d o l o g i e s o f r i s k assessment. The p r o c e s s o f r i s k assessment i s the aggregation o f interactions with decision-makers in the application of risk assessment approaches. (These i n t e r a c t ions i n v o l v e t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s and t h e e x e r c i s e o f v a l u e judgments.) The methodologies of risk assessment are the techniques u t i l i z e d i n a s c i e n t i f i c approach t o e s t imat ing probabilities and risk assessment p e r f o r m in g (excluding the a p p l i c a t i o n o f value j u d g m e n t s ) --an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f the process. I t i s also noteworthy t h a t the r i s k assessment p r o c e s s - - t h e s e t t i n g of v a 1 ue judgments and quantifiction--is critically important, because it facilitates the educational process of the analysts and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and their understanding of the methodologies. In turn, the methodologies s e r v e as important stimuli for d e c i s i o n (in addition to their contribution to the quantification of i n f o r m a t i o n and its transformation into if the i n t e l l igence), even methodologies themselves a r e not v e r y good. Clearly, methodologies a r e a necessary c o n d i t i o n f o r a c r e d i b l e and v i a b l e r i s k assessment process, b u t a r e n o t , b y any means, sufficient.
'

2)

Risk quantification, which entails formulating appropriate measures o f r i s k and e s t i m a t i n g the likelihood (probability) of occurrence o f a l l consequences a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r i s k y e v e n t s as well as t h e m a g n i t u d e o f such consequences. R i s k e v a l u a t i o n , which includes se 1 e c t i o n of evaluation procedures (e.g. optimizing expected v a 1 ue, trade-off ana 1 y s i s) and analysis of impacts of v a r i ous poss i b 1 e r i s k y events. R i s k a c c e p t a n c e and a v e r s i o n , which r e q u i r e decision-making regarding b o t h an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l o f r i s k and i t s e q u i t a b l e distribution. T h i s phase o f r i s k assessment a l s o involves t h e development o f r i s k c o n t r o l (i.e., measures t o r e d u c e o r prevent r i s k )

3)

4)

5)

R i s k management, w h i c h involves the formulation of policies, the development of risk-control o p t i o n s ( i .e. methods t o r e d u c e or p r e v e n t r i s k ) , and e x e c u t i o n o f such p o l i c y o p t i o n s .

The l a s t t w o s t a g e s o f the risk-assessment p r o c e s s - - r i sk a c c e p t a n c e and a v e r s i o n and r i s k management--overlap to a large e x t e n t and r e q u i r e t h e s u b j e c t i v e j udgmen t of the appropriate decision-makers i n trading-off the noncommensurate beneficial and a d v e r s e consequences r e s u l t i n g f r o m u1 t i m a t e "acceptable r i sk" the decision. The e x i s t e n c e o f t h e s e fundamental trade-offs among conflicting and noncommensurate multiple objectives and a t t r i b u t e s demands t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f risk management as an i n t e g r a l p a r t of

T h i s process can help to i d e n t i f y and a r t i c u l a t e t h e i s s u e s upon w h i c h t h e r e i s agreement among decision-makers, and a l s o t h o s e f o r w h i c h t h e r e i s n o agreement. The process a l s o h e l p s t o make t h e implicit explicit. T h i s outcome, however, may embarrass decision-makers under certain circumstances.

-60-

The u l t i m a t e e f f i c a c y o f risk assessment in water resources p l a n n i n g and management can be it measured by the assistance provides planners and the decision-makers i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g and/or management. I t renders t h i s a s s i s t a n c e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g ways: (a)

I t i d e n t i f i e s t h e sources o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y a s s o c i a t e d with exogenous v a r i a b l e s and e v e n t s d e r i v e d f r o m demographic, hydrologic, econom i c , meteorological, environmental, institutional, and political factors. I t quantifies the input-output relationships w i t h respect t o the randomness of these exogenous v a r i a b l e s and e v e n t s t o t h e degree possible and feasible, given the constraints o n d a t a and i n f o r m a t i o n .
I t quantifies, to the degree possible and feasible, the p o t e n t i a l o r p r o b a b l e impacts t h a t r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y and t h e i r associated trade-offs w i l l have on alternative policy decisions.

(b)

reliability of of the degree o f available information. The ideas and m e t h o d o l o g y a d v o c a t e d in this s e c t i o n a r e b o t h i n congruence w i t h and in support of t h e above statement. While there is near unanirni t y among water planners regarding the imperativeness o f s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s , t h e ways and means of c o n d u c t i n g sens i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s and i n t e g r a t i n g i t i n t o t h e o v e r a l l study or p l a n are s t i l l debatable. I n p a r t i c u l a r , the trend has been t o u s e s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s as a post-study and extrinsic evaluation (of the study), r a t h e r t h a n as a g e n u i n e component o f the study i n terms o f t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s o f t h e r i s k s , c o s t , and b e n e f i t s - - a s i s proposed h e r e . The use of comb i ned u n c e r t a i n t y and s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s in water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g has gained some attention in the i n r e c e n t years. The literature u n c e r t a i n t y s e n s i t i v i t y i n d e x method ( U S I M ) d e v e l o p e d b y Haimes and H a l l (1977) i s s u c h an example. I t can b e shown t h a t a b u s i n e s s - a s - u s u a l policy ( i g n o r i n g u n c e r t a i n t y and s e n s i t i v i t y analysis) can be t o o c o s t l y i n terms o f d e v i a t i o n from achieving the original mode-1 objectives. The U S I M assesses, i n a mu 1 t i o b j e c t iv e framework , the t r a d e - o f f s between t h e c o s t o f added a s s u r a n c e and t h e t h r e a t s posed b y uncer t a in t y

(c)

(d)

It facilitates the decision-making process by e n a b l i n g d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t o make t h e utmost s c i e n t i f i c use of informat ion about risk and uncertainty related to the t r a d e - o f f and d e c i s i o n a n a l y s i s o f human f a c t o r s .

5.6 Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis is an i n t e g r a l and i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f S t a g e 4 o f t h e water resources process because o f t h e inherent randomness of hydrologic and s o c i o e c o n o m i c In the revised Principles events. and S t a n d a r d s f o r Water and R e l a t e d Land R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g , Level-C (Federal Register 1980), t h e U.S. Water Resources Council states: The planners primary r o l e in d e a l i n g w i t h r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y i s t o i d e n t i f y t h e areas of s e n s i t i v i t y and d e s c r i b e them c l e a r l y so t h a t d e c i s i o n s c a n be made w i t h k n o w l e d g e

The d e f i n i t i o n o f r i s k i n the t o be sense of an objective minimized appears t o b e simple, but this is deceptive s i nce the minimization of risk is in fact A t question i s e x t r e m e l y complex. usually a long l i s t o f undesirable of outcomes and combinations outcomes, e a c h w i t h a n o n - n e g l i g i b l e probability o f occurring. W h i l e i n some c a s e s a s p e c i f i c quantitatiye risk i n d e x can b e d e f i n e d and u s e d as a n o b j e c t i v e , will b e an more often there e x c e s s i v e number o f such indices. I n such c a s e s , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t certain risk-related characteristics o f t h e s y s t e m can b e identified, quantified, and u s e d t o s e r v e as a

-61-

s i n g l e measure o f many o f those individual r i s k objectives. Among these characteristics, sensitivity--which r e l a t e s changes i n the system's performance index (what we have been c a l l i n g o u t p u t ) to possible variations i n the decision variables, constraint l e v e l s , and u n c o n t r o l l e d p a r a m e t e r s coefficients) --is (mode 1 p a r t i c u l a r l y important.

( i i i ) enhancing equal i t y o f economic opportunity. Furthermore, ( i ) may b e (i) (ii) sub-subobjectives

for

i n c r e a s i n g income i n c r e a s i n g consumption goods and s e r v i c e s of

( i i i ) i n c r e a s i n g l e i s u r e time

5.7 Uncertainties associated with goals and objectives

Goals and objectives--once a d o p t e d b y t h e p l a n n i n g team--become t h e dominant f o r c e t h a t d r i v e s t h e are planning process. Goa 1 s pos i t i v e attributes or characteristics strived for by i n d i v i d u a l s or society. Goals o f i n d i v i d u a l s and s o c i e t y are an unbounded s e t ; i . e . , any s t a t e d g o a l is included w i t h i n a t l e a s t one more-encompassing g o a l , and t h e r e i s a s e t o f more n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d g o a l s i t (TECHOM 1 9 7 4 ) . Two m a j o r within sources of u n c e r t a i n t y r e l a t e d t o p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s s h o u l d be i d e n t i f i e d and a d d r e s s e d a t t h i s stage of the planning process. These are (i) perceptions of long-term societal goals and o b j e c t i v e s and ( i i ) p e r c e p t i o n s o f of the long-term avai l a b i 1 it y technological and n o n t e c h n o l o g i c a l measures (means) w i t h which the p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s c a n b e achieved.

(iv)

increasing s t a b i l i t y t h e economy

of

A f u r t h e r look a t t h e h i e r a r c h y of sub-subobjectives f o r (iv) above may b e

(i) increasing t h e growth r a t e o f p e r c a p i t a income of

( i i ) decreasing the r a t e i n f l a t i o n nationwide ( i i i)reducing unemployment (iv) present

reducing present f a i lure,

business

and so o n . The p o i n t is that there are myriad sources of errors and uncertainties i n t h e d a t a base, t h e m o d e l l i n g assumptions, t h e models t h e m s e l v e s , and human p e r c e p t i o n s ; moreover, these errors and uncertainties are associated w i t h a l l l e v e l s o f g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s , w h i c h means t h a t t h e p l a n n i n g team must make a c o n c e r t e d e f f o r t to a c c o u n t f o r them, e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g the stage o f f i n a l p l a n s e l e c t i o n . T h i s a c c o u n t a b i l i t y can be a c h i e v e d through the use of quantitative-empirical methods o r heuristic-normative approaches, or t h r o u g h an a p p r o p r i a t e c o m b i n a t i o n o f both. The same a r g u m e n t a p p l i e s to uncertainties associated w i t h the perception o f t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of 1 ong- t e r m technological and nontechnological means o f a c h i e v i n g t h e p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s . This is particularly true for the

It is worth noting that s o c i e t a l g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s are i n t r i n s i c a l l y hierarchical--a fact t h a t m a g n i f i e s what the u n c e r t a i n t y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each s u b g o a l and subobjective contributes to the u n c e r t a i n t y of the overall s o c i e t a l g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s . Consider, f o r example, t h a t enhancing economic o p p o r t u n i t y i s an i m p o r t a n t s o c i e t a l g o a l i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s (TECHOM 1974). The f o l l o w i n g many c o n s i t u t e a set o f subobjectives of t h i s goal:
(i) enhanc i ng standards enhancing s tandards present 1 iving

(i i)

future

1 iving

a s s e s s m e n t o f f u t u r e t e c h n o l o g y and re1 iabi 1 i ty, and its cost , acceptability. Any one o f numerous examples, f r o m DDT t o a s b e s t o s t o s o l i d - w a s t e d i s p o s a l , can s e r v e as a case i n p o i n t . T h u s , t h e p l a n n i n g team s h o u l d the assess and eva 1 u a t e u n c e r t a i n t i e s associated w i t h the wh i c h the se 1 ec t e d goa 1 s u p o n plan(s) a r e g r o u n d e d and w i t h t h e ways and means (measures) of r e a l i z i n g these g o a l s .

5.8

Impact analysis and policy analysis

An i m p o r t a n t g o a l o f systems analysis is the reduction of or undeserved un i n t e n d e d consequences. Impact analysis, which i s the p a r t o f p o l i c y a n a l y s i s i ssues, concerned with these c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e achievement o f t h i s g o a l by t h e identification, evaluation, and alleviation of p r o j e c t e d adverse e f f e c t s . While the planning a l t e r n a t i v e s i n Stage 3 a r e screened on t h e b a s i s o f a g g r e g a t e d a t a and s i m p l i f i e d system representation, the l e v e l o f accuracy a t t h a t stage does n o t a l l o w t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a l l p r i m a r y and s e c o n d a r y i m p a c t s i n sufficient detail. However, in Stage 4, the environmental, economic, and s o c i a l impacts of a few selected a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e c o n s i d e r e d i n more depth. Several systems analysis methodologies are available for impact and pol icy analyses, i n c l u d i n g t h e L e o p o l d m a t r i x and t h e rnultiobjecive multistage impact a n a l y s i s method (Gomide and Haimes 1984). G e n e r a l l y , i m p a c t and p o l i c y a n a l y s e s can be c a r r i e d o u t on two separate, albeit somehow overlapping, levels. One l e v e l o f a n a l y s i s i s endogenous--pertinent t o the water r e s o u r c e s system models i n the planning. This level used includes the sensitivity and uncertainties associated w i t h the modelers' assumptions about the and their structure, mode 1 s topology, parameters, d a t a bases,

o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques, etc. To some e x t e n t , endogenous i m p a c t s a r e c o n t r o l l a b l e by t h e m o d e l e r . The o t h e r l e v e l o f a n a l y s i s i s exogenous t o t h e models and c o n c e n t r a t e s o n the influence o f various p o l i c y o p t i o n s on t h e o v e r a l l s o c i o e c o n o m i c to e n v i r o n m e n t and how i t i s l i k e l y A water react to t h i s influence. p r o j e c t can have an i m p a c t on many aspects of society--education, population distribution, transportation, h e a l t h s a f e t y , and economic dislocation. From a welfare economic perspective, a l a r g e investment i n any sector, including the water sector, precludes f u n d s and r e s o u r c e s f r o m g o i n g t o o t h e r s e c t o r s i n any g i v e n economy. International funding a g e n c i e s a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y eager to e v a l u a t e such a s p e c t s b e f o r e t h e y fund large-scale water projects. The impact a n a l y s i s component is p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t i n Stage 4 o f t h e p l a n n i n g process, where e v e r y p l a n or p o l i c y o p t i o n should be accompanied b y p o l i c y a n a l y s i s - - s o that all future and project consequences (both f a v o r a b l e and unfavourable) should be i d e n t i f i e d , assessed, q u a n t i f i e d ( t o t h e e x t e n t p o s s i b l e ) , and i n t e g r a t e d w i t h i n t h e decision-making process.
~

Impact a n a l y s i s and policy analysis should be particularly f o c u s e d on t h e r i s k a n d u n c e r t a i n t y associated with water resources p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . The planning a c t i v i t y , by definition, r e p r e s e n t s f u t u r i s t i c a s p e c t s , where elements of r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y dominate socioeconomic, demographic, environmental, and institutional p r o j e c t ions.

5.9 Model(s) as part study product

of

the

Two c a t e g o r i e s o f models c a n b e i d e n t i f i e d as a b y - p r o d u c t of he study: (a) models u s e d f o r t h e p l a n n ng process, w h i c h may be m o d e l s developed s p e c i f i c a l l y for the study o r adopted from o t h e r water resources p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s

-63-

(b) m o d e l s f o r t h e o p e r a t i o n o f s y s t e m t o be implemented

the

These models may be d e v e l o p e d as planning-for-operation models during the planning or design process. Each o f t h e two c a t e g o r i e s o f m o d e l s s h o u l d be w e l l a d a p t e d t o e x i s t i n g computer facilities and must b e p r e s e n t e d t o t h e u s e r in a form suitable for proper and efficient utilization. I f one a c c e p t s t h e p r e m i s e t h a t planning is a con t i nuous , never-ending process for which appropriate institutional conditions must b e c r e a t e d , t h e n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f m o d e l s as a p a r t o f t h e s t u d y p r o d u c t c a n n o t be o v e r emphasized. This, in particular, refers to large-scale, long-term planning studies. I n a l l c a s e s , t h e second t y p e o f m o d e l s m e n t i o n e d above is important. Making t h e model p a r t o f t h e p r o d u c t means t h a t t h e c u s t o m e r w i l l be i n a p o s i t i o n t o c o n t i n u e the work. In addition, this transfer of t h e model a l s o e n t a i l s transfer of ideas, communication w i t h t h e c l i e n t s a t a very d e t a i l e d level, closing credibility gaps, etc. The s u b j e c t o f models as p a r t o f the study product brings t o focus the important issues of technology transfer, mode4 ma i n t e n a n c e , and clearinghouses f o r models; these issues were addressed i n d e t a i l in 1982 s t u d y b y t h e O f f i c e o f the Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress ( U . S . OTA 1982). In large and complicated s t u d i e s , models a r e o f t e n c o n s i d e r e d as part of the project t o be d e l i v e r e d t o the customer, i n c l u d i n g an o p e r a b l e p r o g r a m o f t h e model that i s s u i t a b l e t o the customer's computer f a c i l i t i e s . These m o d e l s may p r o v e t o be m o s t v a l u a b l e t o t h e customer for future use for reevaluation of new d a t a o r for modifications in the original in project required by changes exogenous variables or demand parameters. The model and its computer p r o g r a m s h o u l d be made a v a i l a b l e t o t h e c u s t o m e r i n what i s

known a s u s e r - f r i e n d l y p a c k a g e s and s h o u l d b e w e l l documented, w i t h all s t e p s made t r a n s p a r e n t t h r o u g h f l o w charts, text statements, examples, and f i g u r e s . The t r a i n i n g o f personnel who can o p e r a t e and u s e t h e s e m o d e l s - - a n integral part of a project's product--is often essential. Sadly, t h i s o f t e n c o n s t i t u t e s one o f t h e weakest links in the planning process. I t should b e the p r a c t i c e i n development a i d p r o j e c t s t o l e a v e a l l t h e s o f t w a r e t h a t has been u s e d with the receiving counterpart agency, and i n some p r o j e c t s e v e n t h e computers w i l l need to be supplied. Accordingly, the t r a i n i n g of personnel Plays an e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g importance. This i s particularly critical (and a l m o s t imperative) i n developing countries.

5.10 Planning for operation

Planning f o r operation, which g e n e r a l l y leads t o t h e generation o f operational rules f o r the p r o j e c t , i s p e r h a p s one o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t technical steps i n the planning process. I t i s a l s o t h e most i n t e n s i v e systems analysis step, where t h e synergism r e s u l t i n g f r o m the i n t e g r a t i o n o f s i m u l a t i o n and optimization i s most e v i d e n t i n i t s potency. Although the operational rules generated in the planning-for-operation step are developed f o r the e n t i r e planning horizon, they a r e n o t expected t o be followed t o the l e t t e r i n actuality. Indeed, t h e s e o p e r a t i o n a l r u l e s a r e o f t e n m o d i f i e d once t h e p r o j e c t i s compl e t e d and the real-world o p e r a t i o n commences. However, t h e y do s e r v e t h e f o l l o w i n g important o b j e c t i v e s i n the p l a n n i n g process:
(a)

P r o v i d e an a n a l y t i c a l mechanism w i t h which t o develop design c r i t e r i a and, t h u s , o p t i m i z e t h e p r o j e c t des i gn.

(b) E n a b l e t h e p l a n n e r - d e s i g n e r to b e t t e r understand the couplings among t h e v a r i o u s subsystems ( r e s e r v o i r s , r i v e r s , groundwater and, systems, e t c .) consequently, t o account f o r t h e

-64-

s y s t e m s c o n s t r a i n t s and attributes. (c)

systems

Enable t h e agency, o r agencies, responsible for operating the project t o i n i t i a t e contractual agreements w i t h , for example, e l e c t r i c power utilities or water supply d i s t r i c t s . These c o n t r a c t s can be v e r y tight in their d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m and, therefore, a well-developed set of o p e r a t i o n a l r u l e s c a n become an essential ingredient in e n s u r i n g t h e o v e r a l l success o f the project.

of mode 1 building, mode 1 optimization, and mode 1 presentation. The s t u d i e s t h a t h a v e f o u n d t h e b e s t a c c e p t a n c e and t h a t a r e a c t u a l l y implemented a r e m o s t l y studies i n which the decision-makers have been so c l o s e l y i n v o l v e d t h a t t h e y i d e n t i f y w i t h them.
However, i n many s t u d i e s such an i n v o l v e m e n t i s n o t p o s s i b l e , and the analyst has t o c o n v i n c e t h e decision-makers o f t h e e f f i c a c y o f the finished product. Most important i s t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e s t u d y must b e p r e s e n t e d i n a c l e a r and c o n v i n c i n g manner, with as l i t t l e t e c h n i c a l j a r g o n as p o s s i b l e . The t e x t s h o u l d be accompanied w i t h meaningful and self-explanatory figures. Only f i g u r e s t h a t d i r e c t l y r e l a t e t o t h e r e s u l t s should be shown i n t h e main t e x t , w i t h a l l other material relegated to appendices o r to special annexes. Interaction with the throughout the dec i s i on-maker (s) e n t i r e p l a n n i n g process should be emphasized--if t h e r e i s i n s u f f i c i e n t interaction i n Stage 1, even t h e b e s t v i s u a l w i l l n o t h e l p i n Stage

(d) May l e a d t o d i s c o v e r y o f major gaps i n d a t a needs. In this a new d a t a collection case, process c a n b e s t a r t e d much e a r l i e r than otherwise. (e) May h e l p t o u n c o v e r e a r l y s i g n s o f c o n f l i c t s w i t h o t h e r agencies and/or water r e s o u r c e s o p e r a t i n g enti ties. In t h i s case, a process o f n e g o t i a t i o n may b e i n i t i a t e d and/or some o f the p r o j e c t d e s i g n may b e a l t e r e d t o accommodate these new1 y discovered institutional or organizational constraints. (f) Provide an indispensable t r a i n i n g medium f o r t h o s e who a r e c o m m i s s i o n e d t o o p e r a t e and it is manage t h e p r o j e c t when completed. (9) A s s i s t i n t h e development of a cost-sharing formula f o r the p r o j e c t (as a p p r o p r i a t e )

4.
Most s t u d i e s and r e p o r t s w i ' l l be r e v i e w e d b y p e o p l e r e p r e s e n t i n g a wide spectrum o f b a c k g r o u n d s and interests. A t e c h n i q u e t h a t can s u f f i c i e n t l y cover such a range i s t o o f f e r t h r e e m a i n segments, each written at a somewhat d i f f e r e n t 1 eve1 : (i)

These and other objectives associated with the operational r u l e s d i c t a t e t h a t t h e p l a n n i n g team adhere to a well-conducted planning-for-operation step i n the p l a n n i n g process.

A summary d e v o i d o f t e c h n i c a l j a r g o n c a n be w r i t t e n t h a t w i l l be s u i t a b l e f o r politicians, bureaucrats, and sen i o r journal ists.

5.11 Modes of presenting the plan to the decision-makers

A good s y s t e m s t u d y loses its v a l u e when t h e s y s t e m a n a l y s t i s n o t the able to conv i nce d e c i s i o n - m a k e r (s) of the study usefulness. Therefore, the d e c i s i o n - m a k e r ( s ) s h o u l d be i n v o l v e d a s much as p o s s i b l e i n t h e p r o c e s s

( i i ) The m a i n t e x t c a n be d i r e c t e d toward t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l s , who may h a v e t o a d v i s e b u t who a r e not necessarily directly i n v o l v e d i n t h e work.

( i i i ) Techn i c a 1 append i ces c a n be added t h a t a r e aimed a t t h o s e who e i t h e r a r e a l r e a d y i n v o l v e d in t h e p r o j e c t o r who may later become involved a t a stage.

-65-

For t h i s l a t t e r category o f technical experts, the material in t h e a p p e n d i c e s m u s t be p r e s e n t e d i n s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l t o e n a b l e them t o contrad ic t if check, ver if y , appropriate, or change parameter values i n f u r t h e r work. A l l these modes contribute toward the decision-makers understanding of the results. There are, o f course, c i i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f d e c i s i o n s t h a t must be made--technical, political, etc. D u r i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l development o f t h e s t u d y , i t w o u l d be a d v a n t a g e o u s t o have d i s c u s s i o n s and s h a r e t h e progress with the i n v o 1v e d decision-maker. I n most c a s e s , t h e decision-maker w i l l be i n t e r e s t e d i n the extent t o which the planner has considered various options. Another aspect o f t h e mode o f p r e s e n t a t i o n and communication with the decision-maker i nvo 1v e s the presentation of trade-offs in a multiobjective framework. While i t i s p o s s i b l e (and i s j u s t as easy) t o generate trade-offs between, say, recreational act ivities in v i s i t o r / d a y u n i t s and f l o o d damage in areas of f 1 ooded 1 and, communication with the decision-maker i s generally mueh easier and more m e a n i n g f u l i f t h e s e t r a d e - o f f s ake p r e s e n t e d i n terms, say, o f $ / v i s i t o r - d a y and $ / a c r e ( o f flooded land). I n such a c a s e , t h e c o s t f u n c t i o n measured i n m o n e t a r y u n i t s w i l l be u s e d as t h e p r i m a r y objective i n the surrogate worth trade-off (SWT) method of the -constraint formulation.

F i n a l l y , t h e use o f computer graphics through an interactive man-machine mode adds a new dimension t o t h e use o f systems a n a l y s i s i n water resources p l a n n i n g (see, f o r example, Loucks, K i n d l e r , and F e d r a , 1985).

5.12 References
Federal Register. 1980, 45(190) : 64391 Gomide, September

23,

F . , and Y . Y . Haimes. The m u 1 t i o b j e c t iv e , multistage i m p a c t a n a l y s i s method: Theoretical basis. IEEE T r a n s a c t i o n s o n Systems, Man, and 88-98. C y b e r n e t i c s , SMC-14(1), pp.

1984.

Haimes, Y . Y . , and W.A. Hall. Sensitivity, responsivity, s t a b i l i t y and i r r e v e r s i b i l i t y as mu 1 t i p l e object ives in civil systems. Advances in Water R e s o u r c e s , 1 ( 2 ) , pp. 71-81.

1977.

Haimes, Y.Y. (ed). 1981. Risk-Benefit Analysis in Water R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g and Management, Plenum, New York and London. L o u c k s , D.P., J. Kindler, and K. Fedra. 1985. I n t e r a c t i v e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s m o d e l i n g and model use: An overview. Water Resources R e s e a r c h 1 ( 2 1 ) 95-104 TECHCOM--Technical Committee o n Water Resources. 1974 Water Resources P l a n n i n g , S o c i a l Goals, and Indicators: Methodological Development and E m p i r c a l T e s t , for the Office of Water R e s o u r c e s Research, U.S. Department o f the Interior, Utah Water Resources L a b o r a t o r y P u b l i c a t i o n PRWG-131-1, Logan, U t a h .
U.S. OTA--U.S. Office of T e c h n o l o g y Assessment. 1982. Use o f Models for Water Resources Management, P l a n n i n g and P o l i c y . OTA, W a s h i n g t o n , D . C .

Fur t h e r m o r e , communicating absolute values of levels of objectives t o t h e decision-makers (such as cost, flood damage, r e c r e a t i o n , e t c . ) i s o f t e n n o t as meaningful as i f these r e s u l t s a r e communi c a t e d in terms of a p e r c e n t a g e o f a b a s e l e v e l (say, Then, the p r e s e n t cond i t i ons) percentage of improvement (or d e g r a d a t i o n ) can b e j u x t a p o s e d w i t h the absolute levels, and the d e c i s i o n - m a k e r w i l l be i n a p o s i t i o n to judge for himself the a c h i e v e m e n t s (or l a c k o f t h e m ) .

U.S. Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l . 1980. P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s f o r Water a n d R e l a t e d Land R e s o u r c e s P 1 a n n i ng Federal Regi s t e r , September 28, 1980.

6. Developing t h e case studies

The p r e v i o u s chapters have d e t a i l e d t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as a sequence of interacting but n e v e r t h e l e s s d i s t i n c t stages. The stages provide a framework f o r p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g and t h e y c a n a l s o function as a framework for presenting results o f the p l a n n i n g process i n an o r d e r l y f a s h i o n . In f a c t , i t was t h i s approach t h a t was used when i n f o r m a t i o n was b e i n g gathered on t h e case s t u d i e s t h a t A l l f o r m t h e Appendix t o t h i s b o o k . members o f t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p were i n s t r u c t e d t o w r i t e t h e i r case study r e p o r t s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e scheme l a i d out i n Fig. 1.1. T h i s was done t o give the reports a certain uniformity i n spite of the large diversity represented by the p r o j e c t s r e p o r t e d upon. The c a s e s t u d y r e p o r t i n g was further enhanced b y s u b d i v i d i n g t h e stages in t o more detai led categories. However, rather than p r o v i d i n g a more e l a b o r a t e o u t l i n e f o r each o f t h e s t a g e s , i t seemed preferable t o cast the d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of each s t a g e i n t o q u e s t i o n s A t o t a l o f about t o be answered. t h i r t y q u e s t i o n s was f o u n d t o b e adequate t o cover a l l s t a g e s , and t h e s e a r e l i s t e d i n Appendix I .
6.1 The example case study

analysis techniques himself. This s o r t o f reasoning l e d t o t h e choice of the example, a small water resources development scheme designed f o r t h e s i n g l e purpose o f flood protection ( w i t h some s i d e of low-flow augmentation benefits and r e c r e a t i o n ) . T h i s example (Case Study 1) was w o r k e d o u t and s e n t t o a l l members o f t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p t o own written guide thei r presentations. The c h o i c e o f p r o j e c t s t o be r e p o r t e d upon, however, was l e f t t o t h e members o f t h e w o r k i n g group, and t h u s a h e a l t h y m i x o f c a s e s was obtained. They range from a s t u d y from t h e r e g i o n a l ( L e v e l B) U.S. (Case S t u d y 4) t o a n a l m o s t purely hydrological p r e l iminary s t u d y done i n Denmark (Case S t u d y 7). Table 6.1 groups the case studies according t o c e r t a i n t y p i c a l criteria. 6.2

Instructions used in formulating the case studies

To h e l p with the w r i t ng process, a n example was p r e p a r e d t o i l l u s t r a t e how t h e case s t u d es s h o u l d b e w r i t t e n and t o g i v e an i d e a o f what k i n d t h e y s h o u l d be. I t was a p p a r e n t t o t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p that large-scale international p l a n n i n g e f f o r t s on v e r y l a r g e water resources projects are o f less i n t e r e s t t o the intended r e a d e r s h i p of t h i s book t h a n t h e e v e r y d a y p r o j e c t s done i n member c o u n t r i e s . I f a c a s e s t u d y shows how u s e f u l systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s have been ( o r c o u l d have b e e n ) , a r e a d e r may be e n c o u r a g e d t o t r y systems

Each case s t u d y b e g i n s w i t h an introduction that out1 ines the planning s i t u a t i o n i n the country of its location, along w i t h a b r i e f description of the project and its origin. A f t e r t h i s , t h e d e t a i l s of the study are given, e x p l a i n e d by means o f answers to the l i s t of questions. A1 1 authors were instructed t o follow the set of i n s t r u c t i o n s l i s t e d below. 1. Case s t u d y r e p o r t s s h o u l d cover the entire project planning p r o c e s s , d i s c u s s i n g one b y one a l l of the five planning stages Chapter a r t i c u l a t e d i n F i g u r e 1.1, 1.

2. One of t h e m a j o r o b j e c t i v e s o f the e n t i r e e f f o r t i s t o cast applications of system a n a l y s i s i n terms o f t h e r e a l - w o r l d c o m p l e x i t i e s of t h e p l a n n i n g process. While

-68-

discussing each o f the planning stages, all t h e systems a n a l y t i c methods a p p l i e d s h o u l d b e d e s c r i b e d , and e v e n u n s u c c e s s f u l attempts o f application of methods o f f e r e d b y systems analysis should be illuminated.

participating in the planning be p a r t i c u l a r l y process. I t will in i l l u m i n a t i n g t o d i s c u s s t h e ways which conf 1 i c t situations were resolved (including the application of b o t h a n a l y t i c and heuristic methods).

3. Especially useful f o r the project will be background i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t , w h i l e i t may seem t o be o f no p a r t i c u l a r s c i e n t i f i c v a l u e , may p r o v e t o be o f critical v a l u e f o r p r o j e c t development (e.g., manpower l i m i t a t i o n , l a c k o f access t o computing installations, too s h o r t deadline for r e s u l t s , etc.)
4. I t s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d that the e n t i r e e f f o r t concerns i t s e l f w i t h t h e process o f p r o j e c t s planning. These p r o j e c t s may b e o f d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r and m a g n i t u d e : in the however, our interest is u n d e r t a k i n g s t h a t were p l a n n e d f o r a r e l a t i v e l y immediate implementation. Long-term countrywide planning e f f o r t s of a strategic nature are b e y o n d t h e scope o f t h e work t o b e u n d e r t a k e n b y o u r W o r k i n g Group.

8 . U n c e r t a i n t i e s and r i s k s a r e inherent i n a l l planning e f f o r t s . I t should be recognized e x p l i c i t l y This how they were hand 1 ed. concerns project o b j e c t iv e s , a v a i l a b l e d a t a , model formulation, e s t i m a t i o n o f model p a r a m e t e r s , e t c .

9. P r o j e c t s b e i n g d i s c u s s e d i n these g u i d e l i n e s normally don't allow for d e v e l o p m e n t o f any m a j o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n programmes: Their p l a n n i n g must be based on t h e d a t a available at the moment of initiation. However, sometimes " c r a s h programmes" f o r c o l l e c t i o n o f certain absolutely indispensable data are organized. I t would be i n t e r e s t i ng to i 1 1u m i n a t e such aspects of the data c o l l e c t i o n programmes.
10. Because o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t o f IHP i n t h e h y d r o l o g i c a l inputs t o the water resources planning process, the hydrologic d a t a t h a t were u s e d should be explicitly recognized in the planning process. Problems r e l a t e d natural t o t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of hydrology (streamf low s e r i e s ) a r e o f interest, as w e l l as t h e use o f runoff models in the rainfall context o f water resources planning. 11. I n accordance w i t h t h e of this IHP overall objectives i t i s important t h a t the project, c a s e s t u d y i s p r e s e n t e d i n such a way t h a t l e s s o n s c a n b e drawn t o improve o n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s . What a r e t h e m a i n i m p e d i m e n t s , and how s h o u l d p a s t m i s t a k e s be a v o i d e d ? In this respect, retrospective analysis of already-implemented p r o j e c t s t h a t were p l a n n e d w i t h t h e application of systems a n a l y s i s methods w i l l be o f p a r t i c u l a r v a l u e .

5. Case s t u d y r e p o r t s s h o u l d n o t b e l i m i t e d t o water p r o j e c t s o f a structural character. On the contrary, n o n s t r u c t u r a l p r o j e c t s -s u c h a s as f l o o d p l a i n zoning, i n t r o d u c t i o n o f water c o n s e r v a t i o n i n c e n t i v e s v i a r e g u l a t i o n , and w a t e r p r i c i n g -- w i l l be o f g r e a t v a l u e for p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e f i n a l r e p o r t .
6 . I n a l l case study r e p o r t s , the i n s t i t u t i o n a l framework s h o u l d be i 1 luminated. Who originally conceived the idea of the p r o j e c t ? Who was charged with responsibilities for project planning? Did project initiation i n v o l v e n e g o t i a t i o n s and b a r g a i n i n g among a l l p a r t i e s c o n c e r n e d ? Was i t made c l e a r r i g h t a t t h e o u t s e t who would operate t h e p r o j e c t f o l l o w i n g i t s implementation?

7 . I n m o s t cases p l a n n i n g i s a process f u l l o f controversies. This leads t o c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n s which arise from the m u l t i p l i c i t y of o b j e c t i v e s and m u l t i t u d e o f actors (experts and dec i s i on-makers)

1 2 . These g u i d e l i n e s a r e n o t necessarily inclusive. Each a u t h o r s h o u l d d i s c u s s i n h i s summary r e p o r t

other p e r t i n e n t aspects t h a t he considered valuable and that contributed t o achieving the stated g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h i s IHP project.

d e r i v i n g f r o m i t b e c a u s e t h i s seems t o be t h e m o s t p r o m i s i ng way to generate water resources p r o j e c t s t h a t a r e o f l a s t ng b e n e f i t . Question 3--What decision c r i t e r i a w e r e employed for p r o j e c t intiation?--covers the breadth of possible c r i t e r i a t h a t may b e u s e d in different c o u n t r i e s and u n d e r different political and economic systems. The q u e s t i o n was i n c l u d e d i n t h e hope o f discovering some generalized conclusions that could b e d r a w n o n how t o s e t u p a w a t e r resources p r o j e c t , but the general f i n d i n g was t h a t t h e p l a n i n i t i a t i o n very seldom proceeded f r o m a b a s i s t h a t c o u l d be g e n e r a l i z e d . Q u e s t i o n 4--What constraints were posed?--was intended t o f i n d the types o f l i m i t a t i o n s on water resources p r o j e c t planning t h a t are accepted in different countries, such as issues of landscape modification or environmental protection. The i n t e n t i o n was a l s o to f i n d o u t i f such c o n s t r a i n t s which are established a t the outset, whether they are negotiable, and whether t h e y lead t o l i m i t a t i o n s in t h e scope o f the planning or the scope o f t h e p r o j e c t . Question 5--Did all experts agree on the methods to be employed?--was directed to the question of the composition o f the planning staff and their compatibility. Many types of experts are not w e l l acquainted w i t h the concepts o f system a n a l y s i s . For example, an agricultural e n g i n e e r who i s an e x p e r t o n w a t e r d i s t r i b u t i o n s y s t e m s may n o t s e e h i s part of the p r o j e c t i n t h e same f r a m e as the meteorologist who discusses the r a i n f a l l inputs i n t o an i r r i g a t i o n system. The issue r a i s e d by t h i s q u e s t i o n i s c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n among e x p e r t s d u r i n g t h e formulation o f a project.

6.3 The purpose the questions

and

scope

of

The t h i r t y questions, which were based o n F i g u r e 1 . 1 , C h a p t e r 1 , were p o s e d t o a l l c o n t r i b u t e r s t o I) . t h e case s t u d i e s ( s e e Appendix They w e r e d e s i g n e d t o c o v e r a1 1 important aspects of t h e case studies t h a t are r e l a t e d t o p r o j e c t planning. The r a t i o n a l e f o r the t h i r t y q u e s t i o n s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d next

Planning Stage 1. Project initiation and preliminary planning

F i v e q u e s t i o n s were d i r e c t e d a t Planning Stage 1 . The p u r p o s e o f these questions i s to identify o b j e c t i v e s and p l a n n i n g s t a f f . Q u e s t i o n 1--Was the project initiated on the basis of a l o n g - t e r m p r o g r a m ? - - was d e s i g n e d t o set the case study, into the perspective of national or even international planning, from which many b u t n o t a l l p r o j e c t s d e r i v e . Q u e s t i o n 2--What l e v e l and t y p e o f s k i l l e d personnel and a g e n c i e s were i n v o l v e d i n t h e various stages o f the planning process? Was the public involved, i n particular i n the formulation of project o b j e c t i v e s ? - - c o n s i s t s i n f a c t o f two separate b u t r e l a t e d questions. The first i s concerned w i t h t h e s t a f f performing the study. The second concerns pub 1 i c i nvo 1 vemen t in formulating the initial plan s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . T h i s p u b l i c group i s not u s u a l l y considered i n the e a r l y p l a n n i n g stages o f a p r o j e c t . However, i t i s t h e c o n v i c t i o n o f t h e authors of t h i s book t h a t a w a t e r resources p r o j e c t , carried out at any p l a c e i n t h e w o r l d , must i n v o l v e t h e p e o p l e who a r e t o be s e r v e d by it. It i s necessary f o r these p e o p l e t o b e i n f o r m e d so t h a t t h e y f u l l y understand the implications o f the project and the benefits

Planning Stage 2: collection and processing

Data

The s e c o n d g r o u p o f questions relate t o P l a n n i n g Stage 2 , on t h e data i n v o l v e d and t h e mode of

-70-

g a t h e r i n g and a n a l y z i n g them. Q u e s t i o n 6--What data were used?--concerns n o t s o much t h e details of a l l the data but the networks that are available in v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s and t h e t y p e s o f d a t a t h a t a r e b e i n g used i n the analysis. Not everywhere is a network a v a i l a b l e ; o f t e n i t should b e i n s t a l l e d when i t d o e s n o t e x i s t , it is not b u t e v e n more o f t e n This i s the p o s s i b l e t o d o so. subject of Q u e s t i o n 7--Were only e x i s t i n g d a t a used? But Q u e s t i o n 7 goes f u r t h e r i n suggesting t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e a l s o t o upgrade t h e d a t a base b y continuing measurements d u r i n g t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , o r even during the f i r s t phase o f the operation of the project. I n a more sophisticated planning e f f o r t , i t i s possible t o trade-off length o f data records against design uncertainty. To f i n d o u t i f s u c h t e c h n i q u e s were used, Q u e s t i o n 8--Were OR t e c h n i q u e s u s e d t o d e c i d e o n t h e method o f d a t a collection and length of data r e c o r d s ?--was asked. I t is a d i f f i c u l t p r o b l e m t o o b t a i n economic and other input data for i nc 1 ud i ng optimization models, monetary o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s . I t is o f g r e a t i n t e r e s t t o f i n d o u t how such d a t a a r e s e c u r e d i n d i f f e r e n t countries. T h i s i s t h e purpose o f Q u e s t i o n g--Was a programme s e t up t o take stock o f and/or utilize c r i t e r i a data? Finally, Question 10--Were any s p e c i a l methods u s e d t o a n a l y z e t h e d a t a ? - - w a s aimed a t t h e r e s e a r c h a s p e c t o f d a t a a n a l y s i s and t h e s p e c i a l methods o f h a n d l i n g such t h i n g s as p r o b l e m d a t a b a s e s o r s c a r c e o r unusual t y p e s o f d a t a .

used?--and Q u e s t i o n 12--What t y p e o f institutional s u p p o r t was p r o v i d e d for clearing the planning?--are designed t o g i v e a background on t h e p l a n n i n g team, w h i l e Q u e s t i o n l 3 - - T o what extent did the public participate?--is intended to f i n d o u t i f t h e p l a n n i n g was done b y agencies o n l y , o r whether s c r e e n i n g of a l t e r n a t i v e s also involved the concerned p u b l i c . Question 2 , which also inquired about pub1 i c participation, only covers the project i n i t i a t i o n phase, whereas Q u e s t i o n 13 was d e s i g n e d t o add i n f o r m a t i o n on the l e v e l o f p u b l i c participation throughout the planning

Often t h e p u b l i c i s confronted w i t h a f i n i s h e d p l a n , and i t becomes very d i f f i c u l t i n d e e d f o r somebody who has n o t p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e ful l y s c r e e n i ng process to understand the reasons f o r the selection of the f i n a l project. Such considerations are already i n c o r p o r a t e d t o some e x t e n t i n the final questions of Stage 3. Q u e s t i o n 19--Who made t h e final on the project?--and dec i s i o n Q u e s ti o n 20--Was it an interdisciplinary planning effort?-except t h a t i n t h e s e two q u e s t i o n s t h e j u d g m e n t o f e a c h case s t u d y r e s p o n d e n t i s c a l l e d o n so h e / s h e can make recommendations o n how t h i s s t a g e m i g h t have b e e n e x e c u t e d f o r best resul ts. Q u e s t i o n s 14 t o 18 a r e d i r e c t e d toward t h e p r o c e s s o f s e t t i n g u p a p r e l i m i n a r y model f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f selecting an alternative or alternatives t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d i n d e t a i l i n S t a g e 4. Q u e s ti o n 14--Were many alternatives investigated?--is a question whose answer obviously r e q u i r e s a number l a r g e r t h a n one, because u n l e s s t h e r e i s a c h o i c e a t t h i s stage, there i s no d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s , and no S t a g e 3 e x i s t s . 15--Wha t was the Q u e s ti o n hierarchical structure of the decision-making process associated w i t h p l a n n i r , g d u r i n g S t a g e 3 ? - - i s an inquiry i n t o the decision-making

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and screening of project alternatives

The t h i r d g r o u p o f q u e s t i o n s concerns t h e f o r m u l t i o n o f p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s , S t a g e 3. One r e s u l t of the planning i n i t i a t i o n phase (Stage 1) i s a l a t e r phase i n w h i c h d a t a a r e g a t h e r e d and a l t e r n a t i v e s are formulated. Note t h a t this process u s u a l l y involves a p r o j e c t team. Thus, the f i r s t questions, Q u e s t i o n 11--What resources were

-71-

p r o c e s s a d o p t e d b y t h e team of p l a n n e r s and t h e method by w h i c h i t asserted the support of the decision-makers. I t i s generally a g r e e d t h a t complex w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p r o j e c t s must b e worked on by e x p e r t s o f many d i f f e r e n t kinds. With such v a r i e d input, a team l e a d e r i s needed who i s a u t h o r i z e d t o override incompatible opinions and whose l e a d e r s h i p i s accepted. The second p a r t o f t w o - p a r t Q u e s t i o n 16--What c o n s t r a i n t s were imposed? Who imposed t h e n ? - - a d d r e s s e s the same c o n c e r n , w h i l e t h e f i r s t p a r t i s d i r e c t e d t o w a r d p r o j e c t model formulation, w h i c h depends o n t h e c o n s t r a i n t s under w h i c h t h e p l a n n e r must work. Q u e s t i o n 17--What models where used?--required a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the models f o r t h e S t a g e 3 c a l c u l a t i o n s . These calculations a r e based on r o u g h e s t i m a t e s o f i n p u t s and c o s t s : t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s - a r e done in just s u f f i c i e n t enough d e t a i l t o p e r m i t selection of the f i n a l alternatives i s more i m p o r t a n t , to and, what permit estimation of project costs and o t h e r consequences so t h a t a f i n a l d e c i s i o n o n t h e p r o j e c t c a n be obtained. Because models c a n b e o f very different degrees of re1 i a b i 1 i t y , Q u e s t i o n 18--To what e x t e n t were t h e s e models t e s t e d , etc.?--is r e a l l y a q u e s t i o n about t h e expected accuracy o f Stage 3 calculations.

objective functions been q u a n t i f i e d .

(if

any)

have

OR methods Q u e s t i o n 21--What were u s e d ? - - c o n c e r n s t h e methods o f analysis by which t h e f i n a l p r o j e c t and i t s o p e r a t i o n w e r e s p e c i f i e d . The n e x t two q u e s t i o n s , Question 22--Did you use cost-benef i t a n a l y s i s ? - - a n d Q u e s t i o n 23--Did you make a r i s k o r i m p a c t a n a l y s i s ? - - a d d i m p o r t a n t d e t a i l s t o t h e response t o Q u e s t i o n 21, because t h e s e t w o t y p e s .. o f a n a l y s s y i e l d t h e most i m p o r t a n t decision c r i t e r i a for final plan se1 e c t i o n and p r o j e c t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n decision. The same i s t r u e for 25--What procedure of Q u e s tion t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s was f o l l o w e d w i t h respect to env i ronmenta 1 vs econom i c ssues?--except that this question i s more c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e details of the analysis technique than with presentation of the results. These a n a l y s e s , w h i c h w e r e already part of Stage 3, are final repeated in Stage 4 f o r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . . They a r e p e r h a p s made b y a g r o u p who have had more d i r e c t access t o e n g i n e e r i n g c o s t information. Stage 4 must i n v o l v e experienced engineers, preferably t h o s e who w i l l d o t h e f i n a l d e s i g n i n S t a g e 5.

Planning Stage 4: Development of f i n a l project specifications

S t a g e 4 b e g i n s when p r e l i m i n a r y dec i s i o n s concerning project c o n f i g u r a t i o n s have been made, the funds f o r f i n a l p l a n n i n g have been made a v a i l a b l e , and a l l c o n s t r a i n t s and o b j e c t i v e s h a v e been d e t a i l e d . A t t h i s p o i n t , t h e s t a g e has n o t y e t been r e a c h e d f o r doing design, a l t h o u g h t h e t y p e s o f s t r u c t u r e and the design conditions concerning their function w i t h i n the p r o j e c t a r e known. Stage 4 c o n s i s t s o f quantifying i n f o r m a t i o n on d e s i g n discharges, operation rules, etc., within a system model i n which i n t e r a c t i o n s o f a l l system e l e m e n t s as well as trade-offs among

Q u e s ti o n 24--How were the preferred plans selected?--is d i r e c t e d a t f i n d i n g o u t how t h e engineering experts interacted w i t h nontechnical persons in the decision-making process w i t h i n t h e constraints of previous decisions. Q u e s t i o n 26--Did t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r a c c e p t t h e optimum s o l u t i o n ? - - i s t h e ultimate question of t h i s kind. It seeks t o d e t e r m i n e whether the project was actual l y designed a c c o r d i n g t o some optimum ( p r e f e r r e d s o l u t i o n ) i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e systems a n a l y s t s recommendations or w h e t h e r the f i n a l d e s i g n proceeded a l o n g 1 ines. Questio n conventional 27--What was t h e p r o c e s s l e a d i n g t o the approval of the final plan--then, i s the f i n a l step i n the d e c i s i o n process leading t o the final go-ahead g i v e n b y p o l i t i c a l b o d i e s , w h i c h w i l l u s u a l l y a l s o have t o make a v a i l a b l e t h e f u n d s f o r the project. T h i s q u e s t i o n and Q u e s t i o n

-72-

28--What was t h e p r o c e s s o f f u n d i n g the final plan?--are different aspects o f t h e same q u e s t i o n and m u s t b e answered t o g t h e r . Quite a different kind of problem is a d d r e s s e d by Q u e s t i o n 29--Was any post-planning evaluation carried out? Usually the planner of a project receives very little feedback from t h e o p e r a t o r s o f t h e finished project. Thus, v e r y l i t t l e is known about whether water resources projects have real l y performed according t o p l a n o r , i f t h e y have n o t , w h i c h one ( o r more) o f t h e aspects d e v i a t e d from t h e d e s i g n assumptions. Future designs should be allowed t o b e n e f i t from e x p e r i ences w i t h e x i s t i ng p r o j e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n assessing t h e need f o r data requirements.

projects w i 1 1 next section.

be summar

2 ed

n the

6.4 Some conclusions case studies

from

the

Planning design

Stage

5:

Project

The f i n a l q u e s t i o n r e l a t e d t o S t a g e 5 was Q u e s t i o n 3O--Were t h e design drawings p a r t o f your j o b ? T h i s q u e s t i o n was a s k e d i n o r d e r t o f i n d o u t how c l o s e l y d e s i g n e r and planner were a s s o c i a t e d . It is g e n e r a l l y assumed t h a t a p r o j e c t s p e c i f i e d i n Stage 4 must be accepted not only by the decision-maker, b u t a l s o by the d e s i g n e n g i n e e r , who i n t h e p a s t has u s u a l l y been t h e same p e r s o n who d i d the planning. How d i d he o r she r e a c t t o h a v i n g a p l a n n e r t e l l him what d e s i g n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s t o use? I t is p o s s i b l e t h a t 'experience o b t a i n e d d u r i n g t h e c a s e s t u d i e s may b e u s e d t o i n c r e a s e c o o p e r a t i o n and collaboration b e t w e e n p l a n n e r and des i g n e r

The p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , as b r o k e n down into thirty pertinent q u e s t i o n s , p r o v i d e s a g u i d e by which p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g i n water resources resources may p r o c e e d . I f a water p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g team i s able t o it answer a l l t h e s e q u e s t i o n s , t h e n i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e e x p e r t s have done a good j o b o f d r a w i n g u p a c o m p l e t e plan. Some o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e s w h i c h t h e members o f t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p had i n planning i n t h e i r studies or

The type of case study s u b m i t t e d b y members o f t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p m i g h t have been t o some e x t e n t d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e sample case s t u d y chosen and t h e s p e c i f i c s o f the questionnaire. However, t h e case s t u d i e s had a l r e a d y been s u b m i t t e d b e f o r e t h e example was p r e p a r e d , s o most members can be assumed t o have been f r e e o f t h e s t r a i t j a c k e t of a given prior example. I t is t h e r e f o r e remarkable t h a t r e g i o n a l I t p r o j e c t s dominate so g r e a t l y . seems t h a t t h i s p l a n n i n g l e v e l is particularly well s u i t e d t o water resources planning. T h i s i s because most r e g i o n a l s t u d i e s i n v o l v e r i v e r b a s i n s and t h e r e f o r e o p e r a t e w i t h i n natural boundaries and largely w i t h i n c o n s t r a i n t s and o b j e c t i v e s s e t o n l y b y demands o n w a t e r . On a large scale, for example a t t h e national level or for a large economic r e g i o n , w a t e r and i t s u s e and d i s t r i b u t i o n t e n d t o become j u s t one c o n c e r n among many o t h e r s . This means t h a t i n p r o j e c t s on a n a t i o n a l scale, o b j e c t i v e s and c o n f l i c t s may n o t be well surface which w i l l understood by water resources planners, m o s t o f whom have an e n g i n e e r i n g b a c k g r o u n d and s e r v e i n an e n g i n e e r i n g d e p a r t m e n t o f an agency o r u n i v e r s i t y . On t h e o t h e r hand, a s m a l l - s c a l e w a t e r resources p r o j e c t can degenerate i n t o merely the des i gn of hydraul ic Such a p r o b l e m m i g h t structure(s) be q u i t e demanding f o r a des i gn engineer b u t w i l l involve rather 1 i m i t e d scope f o r p l a n n i n g .

The p r e f e r e n c e f o r case s t u d i e s t h a t r e p o r t on p l a n n i n g r e g i o n a l projects is undoubtedly also d i c t a t e d b y the f a c t t h a t , on t h i s l e v e l , water concerns dominate t h e of a water decision process resources project. Under such conditions, there apparently are not many o t h e r conflicting interests. --usua 1 1 y Once t h e "dec i s i on-maker" a ministry of a high-level government agency with broad
'

-73-

powers--has determined that the water resources o f a r e g i o n a r e t o be d e v e l o p e d , the execution o f the planning process is left to engineers, who use t h e i r best j u d g m e n t i n d e c i d i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s and s t r u c t u r e s t h a t w i l l accomplish t h e objective of water resources development. These e n g i n e e r s u s e t h e b e s t methods a v a i l a b l e t o them: the projects that have been d e s c r i b e d i n t h e c a s e s t u d i e s have m o s t l y b e e n c a s e s where t h e d e s i r e t o do t h e j o b as w e l l as p o s s i b l e has l e d i n a n a t u r a l way t o t h e u s e o f a more o r l e s s comprehensive systems a p p r o a c h . Although many regional water r e s o u r c e s systems or planned have been d e v e l o p e d without t h e use o f systems a n a l y s i s and o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h methods, it is likely that t h e number o f p r o j e c t s developed i n t h i s manner w i l l d e c r e a s e i n t h e f u t u r e as more engineers familiar with such techniques are e n t r u s t e d w i t h water resources planning.

distribution systems, they can materially improve t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of water resources. Some i n f o r m a t i o n would be d e s i r a b l e on how w e l l t h e systems t h a t o p e r a t e o n optimized operation rules are performing. I t seems likely that o p e r a t o r s would s t e e r a s a f e c o u r s e by u s i n g o p t i m i z e d r u l e s t h a t y i e l d an optimum (on t h e a v e r a g e ) when n o forecasting of f u t u r e events is included. These c a n b e s u p p l e m e n t e d by i n d i v i d u a l a d j u s t m e n t s b a s e d o n experience w i t h the actual operation of t h e system, thereby achieving enough o p e r a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y t o b e a b l e t o a d j u s t t o l a t e r changes o f objectives or operation rules. I t i s a l s o noteworthy t h a t no c a s e s t u d y makes r e f e r e n c e s t o an o p e r a t i o n a l f o r e c a s t i n g model that p e r m i t s a d a p t i v e o p e r a t i o n based o n real-time h y d r o l o g i c events. One r e a s o n f o r t h i s may b e r e l a t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t these water resources systems p e r f o r m f a i r l y w e l l w i t h o u t of future real-time forecasting demands or supplies, and the p e r f o r m a n c e can b e i m p r o v e d o n l y b y f o r e c a s t i n g extreme events t h a t a r e extremely rare. An example o f t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s i s t h e f o r e c a s t i n g of f l o o d s i n small catchments. In principle, t h e r e h a v e been a number o f r e s e a r c h studies that show that an improvement i n f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n can be obtained through real-time f o r e c a s t i n g s w i t h Kalman f i l t e r s o r by means o f s a t e l l i t e or radar evaluation of rainfall. However, the operation implementation of a forecasting system in a small catchment i s n o t c o s t e f f e c t i v e . I t i s not useful t o i n s t a l l a system t h a t w i l l be used o n l y o n c e e v e r y f i f t y o r so y e a r s . The f o r e c a s t i n g a p r o c e d u r e m u s t become p a r t o f multipurpose forecasting a c t i v i t y , where economic feasibi 1 i t y is d i c t a t e d by o t h e r uses. The c a s e s t u d i e s a l s o show v e r y i n the l i t t l e actual optimization sense o f d e t e r m i n i n g t h e o p t i m u m o f an o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n . Simulation i s t h e m o s t common method u s e d f o r p l a n n i n g , and t h e f i g u r e s o f m e r i t

I t i s r e m a r k a b l e t h a t one s t u d y (Case S t u d y 10, by Becker and K o r z e r s k i ) shows t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o develop a standardized o r almost s t a n d a r d i z e d approach t o solving typical water r e s o u r c e s problems i n many d i f f e r e n t sub-basins of a river. I n such a case, systems analysis has become a state-of-the-art technique which supersedes a1 1 previous techniques--a s t a t e o f a f f a i r s t h a t has not been reached i n many countries. I t l i k e l y requires a degree o f acceptance o f systems techniques which can only be obtained if t h e decision-makers concerned with water projects thoroughly understand the p o t e n t i a l and t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e systems approach to water resources p l a n n i ng.
V e r y l i t t l e h a s been s a i d a b o u t t h e i n c l u s i o n o f o p e r a t i o n r u l e s or schedules i n t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n and the specifications derived from them. T h i s i s u n f o r t u n a t e , because i t i s one o f t h e g r e a t hopes o f water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r s t h a t , by providing optimal operation rules or other water for reservoirs

-74-

are mostly p r o b a b i l i t i e s of meeting I S target objectives. Th i s p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l expressed i n the method advocated i n t h e case study b y Becker and K o z e r s k i (see Case 10). I t seems t h a t it i s Study general l y easier for the to base his "dec i s i on-maker" d e c i s i o n s on a m u l t i t u d e o f such f i g u r e s of m e r i t , w h i c h he t h e n to evaluates, not a c c o r d i ng o b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i a b u t according t o h i s subjective impression o f t h e i r relative merit. Indeed, anyone who has been i n v o l v e d i n t h e d e c i s i o n process o f a water resources p r o j e c t has f o u n d t h a t c o s t s or other r a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s a r e v e r y seldom used as c r i t e r i a f o r making t h e f i n a l decision. The d e c i d i n g f a c t o r is political acceptance, which is relative b a s e d on p e r c e p t i o n s o f m e r i t as compared w i t h o t h e r u s e s o f p u b l i c funds. Even i n c a s e s where cost-benefit or similar economic c r i t e r i a play a r o l e i n the decision process ( i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y funded p r o j e c t s , f o r example), o p t i m i z a t i o n i s r a r e l y e v e r employed because o f the difficulty of expressing d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t i v e s i n commensurate terms. ana 1 y s i s Mu1 t io b j e c t i v e methods d e v e l o p e d o v e r t h e p a s t two decades may overcome t h i s p r o b l e m i n a way that i s acceptable t o the d e c i s i o n makers. As a f i n a l o b s e r v a t i o n , m o s t o f t h e s t u d i e s included here involved n o t o n l y water resources planning s t a f f f r o m a n agency o f a c o n s u l t i n g f i r m , b u t t h e y were a l s o accompanied by u n i v e r s i t y teams, which were o f t e n r e s e a r c h teams. I t i s evident that t h r o u g h r e s e a r c h and s t u d y o f the international literature, the a d v a n t a g e s o f systems a n a l y s i s have become a p p a r e n t t o academics e a r l i e r than t o other planners--in part

certainly because of thei r i n f o r m a t i o n advantage, but i n part p r o b a b l y a l s o because academics c a n spend more t i m e i n f o l l o w i n g new approaches t h a n p r o f e s s i o n a l s , who usually work under very t i g h t monetary o r t i m e c o n s t r a i n t s . This situation is typical for a developing f i e l d . The academic w i l l t e n d t o s i m p l i f y p r o b l e m s t o make them f i t t h e methods o f s o l u t i o n t h a t he knows; when he works w i t h a p r a c t i t i o n e r , he w i l l f i n d t h e f l a w s and gaps i n h i s knowledge, w h i c h w i l l prompt h i m t o f u r t h e r d e v e l o p and adjust his methods. This process o f feedback and a d j u s t m e n t continues until either t h e new methods become t o o c o m p l i c a t e d , at which point they find a final r e s t i n g p l a c e i n t h e pages o f a p r o f e s s i o n a l j o u r n a l , or u n t i l t h e y have been f o r g e d i n t o a generally a c c e p t a b l e t o o l t h a t becomes p a r t o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l know-how. I t seems t h a t up t o now i n t h e f i e l d o f w a t e r resources, mostly s imu 1 a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s have r e a c h e d t h e l a t t e r stage. Only t i m e w i l l t e l l , a f t e r a g r e a t deal o f cooperative e f f o r t involving universities, government a g e n c i e s , and c o n s u l t i n g f i r m s , if more s o p h i s t i c a t e d d e c i s i o n m o d e l s w i 1 1 be s u i t a b l e f o r g e n e r a l p r o j e c t planning. The c u r r e n t s t a t e o f a f f a i r s might be summarized as f o l l o w s . Many o f t h e Unesco member c o u n t r i e s have teams o f p e o p l e who keep t r y i n g to improve t h e p l a n n i n g methods f o r water resources p r o j e c t s . I f this book h e l p s t o e n c o u r a g e them t o c o n t i n u e t h e i r work and see t h e i r p r o j e c t as p a r t o f an international at understanding and effort improving t h e p l a n n i n g process f o r water resources p r o j e c t s , it w i l l have s e r v e d i t s p u r p o s e .

Appendix 1: The questionnaire

T h i s appendi x c o n t a i n s a1 1 the q u e s t i o n s t h a t w e r e used t o o u t l i n e and g i v e r e g u l a r i t y t o t h e c a s e that follow. They are studies that grouped under head i ngs represent the f i v e planning stages o u t l i n e d i n Chapter 1 .

7.

Were o n l y e x i s t i n g d a t a u s e d ? I f n o t , w h a t methods were u s e d t o g e t new d a t a : synthetic g e n e r a t i o n ? new measurements? Were measurements continued during the planning stage? during the construction? Were OR t e c h n i q u e s u s e d t o d e c i d e o n t h e method o f d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and l e n g t h o f d a t a ? Was a p r o g r a m s e t up t o a s s e s s the data t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of b a s e u s e d ? Who managed such a program? Were any s p e c i a l methods t o analyze the data? used

Planning Stage 1: Project initiation and preliminary planning

1. Was t h e p r o j e c t i n i t i a t e d on the basis of a long-term program? Discuss b r i e f l y . 2. What l e v e l and t y p e o f s k i l l e d p e r s o n n e l and a g e n c i e s were involved i n the various stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g process? Was the public involved, in p a r t i c u l a r i n the formulation of project objectives? What d e c i s i o n employed for in i t i a t i o n ? c r i t e r i a were the project

8.

9.

10.

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and screening of project alternatives

11.
What r e s o u r c e s w e r e u s e d in t h i s phase o f the planning process, e.g., time, funds, computers, f a c i l i t i e s , . and manpower? What type o f institutional s u p p o r t was p r o v i d e d d u r i n g the planning process, its s o u r c e s , and i t s i m p a c t s ?
To what e x t e n t d i d t h e p u b l i c participate i n the planning and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s ?

3.

4.

What c o n s t r a i n t s were posed? What constraints posed t h e g r e a t e s t p r o b l e m ? Who imposed them? Was there willingness t o discuss these c o n s t r a i n t s ? D i d a l l e x p e r t s a g r e e on t h e methods t o be employed? How was an agreement brought about? (Decision by decision-makers siding with one o f t h e o p i n i o n s ? D e c i s i o n by a p l a n n i n g bureau?)

12.

13.

5.

14.

many alternatives Were investigated? I n what d e t a i l ? Who decided on the alternatives to be investigated? What was the hierarchical of the structure decision-making process associated w i t h the planning o f t h e case s t u d y discussed? Who made what d e c i s i o n s ? How was conf 1 ic t resolution ach i eved? How w e r e t r a d e - o f f S assessed-explicitly? Implicitly?

Planning Stage 2: Data collection and processing

15.

6.

What d a t a w e r e used i n t e r m s of type, scope, frequency, spatial and temporal distribution, etc.? P 1 ease a d d r e s s b o t h h y d r o l o g i c a l and nonhydrological data (e.g., demographical, socio-economic) .

-76-

16.

What c o n s t r a i n t s were imposed? I n your o p i n i o n were they reasonable? A c c e p t a b l e ? Who imposed them? How h a r d w e r e they: C o u l d t h e y be r e l a x e d BY by discussion? decision-makers? What simulation/analytical m o d e l s d i d you u s e and f o r what p u r p o s e ? Which o f t h e s e mode 1 s were d e v e 1 oped elsewhere and which were d e v e l o p e d d u r i n g and f o r t h e project?

23.

risk a you make ana y s i S ? analysis/impact Why: was i t r e q u i r e d by a dec i s i on-maker , o r by whom? What d i d you l e a r n f r o m t ?

Did

24.

17.

18.

To w h a t e x t e n t were these models tested, calibrated, v e r i f i e d , and m o d i f i e d ?

What was t h e r o l e of the experts, the techn i ca 1 decision-makers, and the public i n the f i n a l selection of the f i n a l p l a n ? Was i t an interdisciplinary p l a n n i n g e f f o r t ? Was t h e m i x a p p r o p r i a t e ? What c o n c l u s i o n s and r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s can you share?

How w e r e t h e p r e f e r r e d p l a n s s e l e c t e d ? How w e r e t r a d e - o f f s assessed? Were spec i f i c trade-offs generated? Was a o p t i m iz a t ion mu1 t i o b j e c t i ve methodology used? How i n v o l v e d were d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s (at t h e various levels) in t h i s s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s ? What conclusions and recommendations c a n you s h a r e ? What p r o c e d u r e o f trade-off a n a l y s i s was f o l l o w e d with respect to env i ronmenta 1 concerns vs. econom i c c o n c e r n s and o b j e c t i v e s ? Did the decision-maker accept an " o p t i ma 1 I ' sol u t ion g e n e r a t e d by t h e m o d e l s ? Did he a c c e p t your a p p r o a c h o r was it supplemented by " c o n v e n t i ona 1 I ' i n f orma t i o n ?

25.

19.

26.

20.

27.

Planning Stage 4: Development of final project specifications

21.
What OR methods were u s e d ? F o r e a c h method: d i d you u s e existing models for your project? D i d y o u u s e new developments, modifications? Your own? Where d i d you g e t them f r o m ? D i d you f i n d t h e 1 i t e r a t u r e u s e f u l ? Which book or p a p e r was o f particular value? D i d you a d j u s t the p r o b l e m t o f i t t h e m o d e l ? Was t h e model "optimized"? Did y o u e x p l o r e many different methods? How many? How d i d y o u d e c i d e on t h e one you u s e d ? Would you use i t a g a i n ? H o w much t i m e d i d you spend c n this?
D i d y o u make a c o s t - b e n e f i t analysis? What d i d you l e a r n f r o m i t ? Would you recommend doing t h a t again?

What was t h e p r o c e s s l e a d i n g t o t h e approval o f the f i n a l plan? What was the process funding the f i n a l plan? of

28.

29.

Was any post-planning evaluation carried out?

Planning Stage 5: design

30.

Project

Were t h e d r a w i n g s p a r t o f y o u r j o b ? Who d i d t h e m ? - - a n o t h e r group, somebody in your o f f i c e ? Could you r e l a t e t h e systems analysis results to the designer?

22.

Appendix 1 : Case studies 1

T h i s appendix c o n s i s t s o f ten case s t u d i e s . They a r e a r r a n g e d i n alphabetical order, with two exceptions. Case Study 1, E.J. P l a t e , was w r i t t e n t o p r o v i d e a n example of how t o s t r u c t u r e t h e c a s e studies for t h i s appendix. This example was s e n t t o a l l members o f t h e W o r k i n g Group, and t o t h e o t h e r contributors. Case Study 10, by A. Becker

and D. K o z e r s k i , was n o t s t r u c t u r e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e example o f Case I t is a brief description Study 1. of a general p r o c e d u r e based o n simulation methods for planning water resources p r o j e c t s , and it supplements t h e p r o c e s s e x p r e s s e d i n Rather than C h a p t e r s 1 t o 5. i n t e g r a t i n g t h i s method i n t o t h e t e x t , t h e Ed i t o r i a 1 Board d e c i d e d t o leave the paper as a g e n e r a l contribution t o the overall subject.

Case Study 1

Authors
E. J . P1a t e

Title
P l a n n i n g a System f o r F l o o d P r o t e c t i o n R e s e r v o i r s f o r t h e S u l m Catchment i n t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany Development o f Water S u p p l y Schemes i n t h e E a s t e r n Negev, I s r a e l : General D e s c r i p t i o n Long Term I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n i n g o f t h e D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y i n t h e P r o v i n c e o f S o u t h H o l l a n d (The N e t h e r 1 ands) : I ODZH P o s t E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n Level-B Study

D.

Alkan

A.H.M.Bresser

Y.Y.Haimes K . Sung L.T.Crook D.Gregorka D.T.Howe1 1

The P1 ann i ng P r o c e s s i n t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n Ade 1 a i d e Water R e s o u r c e s S t u d y o f June 1978 Post E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e P l a n n i n g Process i n t h e V i s t u l a R i v e r Basin, Poland Development o f a Water R e s o u r c e s Management Model f o r t h e Susaa Catchment i n Denmark Management o f I s r a e l ' s Water R e s o u r c e s

6
7 8

Z.Kaczmarek J K i nd 1 e r

D. R o s b j e r g

U.Shami r P.Stegaroi u I .Dima R.Amaftiesei V . V i San A . Becker D. Kozerski

P r o m o t i o n o f M u l t i p u r p o s e Water Management F a c i l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare B a s i n

10

A p p l i c a t i o n o f S i m u l a t i o n T e c h n i q u e s i n Water R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g and Management i n t h e German D e m o c r a t i c Republ i c

-78-

a
U

0 c r m
c

c
C

s 0
-VI
L

-a
-n
U-

mIn
mLn
-(U

a *
m

m
c

a
U CI U

U U
?C

2 EH E C L

C L

01

-n

E= E
r

E P

(U

a
c

U
c

>

a
0
c

VI
4-

U
m
7

V
. l

a v
D
c

L
c

a
O

0
c.
r
L

n
0
3

D 0
- c

O C 0 0
c
r

2 b
c

U-

H
3

ca
VI

- J

O L

$
L L
-e

- 0 m1

O L - U

-c
mOK
W O
4-

22
-a
- 1 -

La am aa

mm

c0-m u N m-E 3E-

-0

r c u
Y

>
*>
e v - c
0-"
L~

a-v >- c ->a

C O D 3 D m
(34

VI L

>
C - 0

m 3 >
V C

b
ay
-

>a
ZU-

-4-

O D

.-my,

am-.-.WO

mca
KEmD

>mm>

m a 1 0 1 a - 1 3 -vCLVI U -v-maa c c>- - 4 - a > aD 3 k > l n I n D O n ocom w m n v ~ v , "I+--

- V I

U1

--

z 4 - V I - a

I n

riu-m

LO. v a K > C > Y O U 1DD

L u -

N
c

P
c
. U

m
N

m
0
c

0
L

0
L

h l
c

c
r
r
7

0
D
L

s
c
0
-70,
r

m
C

m r c vo am
0
OW

z
m

-Ln

mm

01 -D DJ
K-

cn

maLn

C O

O m
- l .

E
D
K K

n-

L L

D O

K Q

aL

8
c

r 0-

r m
- L

UU

3In

m m

8
mo rr mm va
aK

-c

be-

r u O C m
P O

8
inn
1

I D

(U
4-

m
VI

5
a
z-a n m
OL
JVI LOU
L > L

c m
In

k!

kb
a
I

b
VI

V C

E:

YY

m-

I u

U 01
.

OE
L-

D -

QJ VI

--K U-U

8 E"

4-0

32

aa ma

I O - r m a V I
BKUU

L J m L

VI - m a aVU~ -

ma03

m --U c c 3 c --rem VI m VIm-o m n>n

Fi

$f
L J D
4- v)

LLEO

aom ca mamo

I n

PLANNING A SYSTEM OF FLOOD PROTECTION RESERVOIRS IN THE SULM CATCHMENT IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

Professor Erich J. Plate (PSC) lnstitut Wasserbau Ill an der Universitat Karlsruhe Kaiserstrasse 12 75 Karlsruhe 1 Federal Republic o f Germany

1.

Introduction

The industrialization of Germany has brought urban d e v e l o p m e n t s and factories into r i v e r f l o o d p l a i n s which i n o l d e r days were f l o o d e d regularly by r i v e r s s w o l l e n f r o m heavy summer rains or early s p r i n g snow m e l t . The t r a d i t i o n a l method o f flood proofing consisted of r i v e r t r a i n i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f f l o o d l e v e e s measures w h i c h t e n d t o a l l e v i a t e t h e f l o o d hazard i n t h e protected r e g i o n b u t i n c r e a s e m a g n i t u d e and s h o r t e n concentration time of the floods downstream. The h y d r o l o g i c a l d e s i g n information for these f l o o d s is o b t a i n e d i n a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d manner by extreme v a l u e a n a l y s i s o f the e x t r e m e f l o o d peaks, o f t e n u s i n g t h e 1 1 1 recommended b y t h e procedure German Water Resources A s s o c i a t i o n (DVWK), which i s based on the Ill Pearson I l l and Log Pearson curves. By means o f h y d r a u l i c calculations flood peaks are converted i n t o s t a g e s f o r t h e newly designed cross s e c t i o n s . The c r o s s sections usually are obtained combining experience w i t h e m p i r i c a l design considerations, although a model has been d e v e l o p e d by Seus and Bauch i n w h i c h L P i s employed t o y i e l d a combination o f cross section geometry and l e v e e h e i g h t which r e q u i r e s a minimum c o s t . The model

i n 121 and i t has been d e s c r i b e d has b e e n a p p l i e d t o some B a v a r i a n r i v e r s b y the authors.

Recent practice has been to d e s i g n a system o f f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n reservoirs, b y means o f w h i c h t h e f l o o d s f r o m t h e upper c a t c h m e n t s a r e r e t a i n e d and r e l e a s e d a f t e r the f l o o d s f r o m t h e lower reaches have receded. The p r a c t i c e has the advantage that apart from t h e widening o f narrow s e c t i o n s and c h a n n e l improvements t h e l o w e r p a r t s of the r i v e r s are kept f r e e o f eng i n e e r i ng structures, thus p r e s e r v i n g them i n t h e i r natural state while at t h e same t i m e obtaining flood protection for the downstream areas. S i nce t h is p r a c t i c e o f f l o o d p r o o f i n g i s used i n West Germany, quite extensively i t i s u s e f u l t o p r e s e n t a case s t u d y IHP o n i t as a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e as p a r t o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e s o f Unesco member countries w i t h operations r e s e a r c h methods, i n s p i t e of the fact that systems a n a l y s i s and OR methods a r e used o n l y m a r g i n a 1 Y .
s the The s y s t e m c o n s i d e r e d 1. It S u l m c a t c h m e n t shown i n F i g . which is typical o f many s y s t e m have b e e n d e s i g n e d and c o n s t r u c t e d i n t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany it i s not i n r e c e n t years, but t y p i c a l i n these respects: first,

-80-

8
c

..

t h e a r e a has been e x c e p t i o n a l l y w e l l equipped w i t h g a g i n g s t a t i o n s f o r r u n o f f and f o r r a i n f a l l , permitting f r i n g e s t u d i e s on t h e e f f e c t o f network d e n s i t y , r e g i o n a l i z a t i o n o f unit hydrographs etc. which wi 11 1 ead to eventually recommendations f o r p r o c e d u r e s t o be t o be a p p l i e d i n f u t u r e systems. S e c o n d l y , a r e s e a r c h team was a v a i l a b l e ( I n s t i t u t Wasserbau I l l o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y of K a r l s r u h e , IWK) w h i c h was not only interested i n s o l v i n g t h e p r o b l e m a t hand b u t a l s o i n u s i n g t h e data o f the study area f o r r e s e a r c h p u r p o s e s , so t h a t t h e cost of t h e d a t a e v a l u a t i o n was covered i n p a r t f r o m research funds. Thirdly, t h e r e s e a r c h team o f t h e IWK was i n t e r e s t e d i n a p p l y i n g OR techniques t o o b t a i n an o p t i m a l solution, although traditionally this problem is solved by e n g i n e e r i n g j u d g e m e n t and consensus o f t h e communities i n v o l v e d w i t h o u t f o r m a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f OR t e c h n i q u e s . A common feature of most Germany f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n schemes i s that the sites available for building flood protection reservoirs a r e few, limited in size, and l o c a t e d u s u a l l y so f a r u p s t r e a m t h a t only a small p a r t o f the r u n o f f from t h e c a t c h m e n t can b e r e t a i n e d b y t h e basin. T h e r e f o r e , t h e p r o b l e m posed usually is this: what i s the p r o b a b i l i t y o f occurrence o f the maximum f l o o d t h a t t h e s y s t e m c a n protect against, and what i s the minimum size of the reservoirs a t t h e p o s s i b l e l o c a t i o n s t o accomplish this protection. Usually this I S constrained by p r o b 1 em innumerable l o c a l c o n d i t i o n s r a n g i n g from the d e s i r e o f the population o f one v i l l a g e t o b e p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t a 100 y e a r f l o o d t o that o f other v i l l a g e s who w o u l d l i k e t o have a v e r y s m a l l o r no r e s e r v o i r so as t o be a b l e t o use t h e a r e a f o r other purposes. Also, f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n by reservoirs can b e supplemented b y r i v e r t r a i n i n g measures. I n order to illustrate the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s f o r such a s y s t e m , the questions of our questionnaire w i l l b e answered i n sequence.

2.

Planning Stage 1: Project I n i t i a t i o n a n d P r e l i m i n a r y Planning

Question 1:
The project was initiated through two developments: the p r o v i s i o n o f t h e l e g a l framework f o r f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n measures t h r o u g h s t a t e and federal laws, which the financial regu1a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and t h e p r o c e d u r e f o r s e t t i n g up f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n systems. In particular t h e laws r e q u i r e s e t t i n g up a d i s t r i c t formed by t h e p r o f i t i n g communities, which must pay 30% o f t h e c o s t , w h i l e t h e r e s t o f t h e c o s t i s c o v e r e d by s t a t e and f e d e r a l sources, s u b j e c t t o approval by t h e S t a t e P a r l i a m e n t . In this sense, t h e p r o j e c t i s p a r t o f a l o n g range p l a n t o p r o t e c t a l l citizens of the country against natural disaster. The second s t e p was t a k e n a f t e r a s e v e r e f l o o d i n 1970 c a u s e d e x t e n s i v e damage i n t h e c i t y o f Neckarsulm.

A flood protection district (FPD) was formed, w h i c h agreed t o d i s t r i b u t e the cost according t o a c o s t s h a r i n g p l a n worked o u t o n t h e basis of share o f b e n e f i t s and financial c a p a b i l i t y and n e g o t i a t e d by t h e l o c a l county a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s . The d i s t r i c t i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e s t a t e water administration (SWA) worked out a preliminary plan, setting aside possible sites, and submitted i t f o r approval t o the State L e g i s l a t u r e which authorized t h e p l a n n i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e system, a l l o w i n g a c e r t a i n budget p e r year f o r S t a t e s u p p o r t - and thus, s i n c e F e d e r a l S u p p o r t i s on a c o s t s h a r i n g percentage, also for Federal funding. W i t h t h e green l i g h t t h u s g i v e n p l a n n i n g proceeded in earnest, resulting in the hydrological calculations and t h e p l a n n i n g recommendations o f t h e IWK.

Question 2:
The s t a t e o f Baden-Wurttemberg m a i n t a i n s a competent s t a f f w i t h i n t h e a r e a b u r e a u o f t h e SWA c a p a b l e al 1 technical and of hand1 i n g administrative tasks. The p u b l i c was i n v o l v e d , t h r o u g h t h e community

councils, i n t h e s e t t i n g up o f t h e FPD. The p u b l i c was thus involved indirectly.

Question 3:
D e c i s i o n c r i t e r i a were: what was i n t e r p r e t e d as t h e d e s i r e o f t h e people to be protected, which and s u r f a c e d a f t e r t h e 1970 f l o o d , the a v a i l a b i l i t y of funds. But p e r h a p s t h e d e c i d i n g f a c t o r was t h a t t h e Audi-NSU w o r k s , which i n 1970 had s u f f e r e d a f l o o d damage o f a b o u t 10 M i l l . DM, t h r e a t e n e d t o move t o another l o c a t i o n unless i t s s i t e in Neckarsulm was p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t floods similar t o the I970 f l o o d . S i n c e o n e r e s e r v o i r ( B r e i t e n a u , see Fig. 1 ) was l a r g e enough t o c o n t a i n more t h a n t h e 100 y e a r f l o o d o f the upstream r e g i o n , s t o r a g e i n i t was s e t a s i d e f o r low f l o w augmentation f o r e x c e p t i o n a l l y d r y years, which d u r i n g o r d i n a r y y e a r s a l l o w e d some u t i l i z a t i o n for recreation.

administrative structure of the the decision-maker on t e c h n aspects i s the local representat He f u l l y c o o p e r a t e d and a c c e p t e d r e s u l t s of t h e planning hydrolog

SWA ca 1 ve. the st.

3. Planning Stage 2: Data Collection and Processing

Question 6:
The d a t a b a s e f o r the study consisted o f hydrological d a t a on r a i n f a l l ( r a i n f a l l gages w i t h d a i l y totals measured everyday, and r e c o r d i n g gages) and r u n o f f (runoff gages a t t h e l o c a t i o n s shown i n F i g . 1). The r a i n f a l l gages w i t h roman 7 n u m e r a l s had been o b s e r v e d f o r years, but long term records from 1950 -1977 were available at s t a t i o n s n e a r t h e Sulm a r e a and were used t o o b t a i n l o n g t e r m s t a t i s t i c s . For l o n g t e r m r u n o f f s t a t i s t i c s t h e r u n o f f gage a t N e c k a r s u l m was used f o r t h e p e r i o d 1956 - 1977.

Question 4:
The c o n s t r a i n t s w e r e s e t b y t h e land a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e system, by the fact that due to other of activities ( r e c u l t i v a t i on vineyards i n t h e a r e a ) one o f t h e r e s e r v o i r s had t o b e s t a r t e d b e f o r e planning was completed, two reservoirs i n t h e r i v e r had a l r e a d y 1970, and been c o n s t r u c t e d b e f o r e f u n d s were a v a i l a b l e t o s t a r t the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f one b a s i n right away. The planner (the local had t o r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e SWA) make p r e l i m i n a r y d e c i s i o n s w i t h o u t t h e b e n e f i t o f a sound h y d r o l o g i c a l basis.

Question 5:
The m a i n e x p e r t s o n t h e p r o j e c t were: the water reservoir planner and h y d r o l o g i c a n a l y s t , i.e. the I W K , and t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f the SWA, in particular the local representative, who a l s o p r o v i d e d the l i a i s o n t o the higher echelons and t o t h e FPD. A l l technical decisions and m o d e l s w e r e d i s c u s s e d w i t h h i m and occasionally with members of the r e g i ona 1 administration. According t o the

A l l y e a r s o f t h e r e c o r d s were used to obtain extreme value statistics, and t o i d e n t i f y f l o o d s and shapes o f f l o o d waves. The network d e n s i t y w i t h 18 raingages for 110 km 2 was f a r l a r g e r t h a n a v e r a g e , because a f t e r t h e f l o o d o f 1970 t h e a r e a had been made a s t u d y area o f the m i n i s t r y responsible f o r t h e water a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . It is more u s u a l t o have r a i n gages one e v e r y 100 t o 500 km 2 . Also, t h e r u n o f f gages o n t h e s m a l l c r e e k s a r e an unusual feature, but they permitted t o regionalize runoff u n i t h y d r o g r p h s , and t h e d a t a have been used (by u s ) t o work o u t more general rainfall-runoff relations. Economic d a t a were n o t r e q u i r e d , except for the cost o f construction for the reservoirs. The v e r y dense n e t w o r k o f gages w a s s e t up w i t h t h e additional purpose of yielding i n f o r m a t i o n on the r e q u i r e d network d e n s i t y f o r s t u d i e s o f t h e same k i n d as t h e one r e p o r t e d on.

Question 7:
For f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n s t u d i e s f l o o d waves o f c e r t a i n exceedance probabi 1 i t ies are requ i red. Naturally, such d a t a had t o be

o b t a i n e d from t h e basic d a t a by extreme value analysis of the r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f d a t a . The f l o o d waves were obtained by using r a i n f a l l waves c a l i b r a t e d a g a i n s t measured waves, whose area was f rom a genera 1 i zed o b t a i ned depth-area-duration curve for r a i n f a l l s o f d i f f e r e n t exceedance probabi 1 i t i e s of the area's A constant runoff subregions. c o e f f i c i e n t was u s e d which was determined from a coaxial-diagram o f the area, and a regionalized u n i t - h y d r o g r a p h was used t o o b t a i n the runoff hydrograph. When possible, t h e extreme v a l u e o f t h e calculated runoff hydrograph was checked a g a i n s t t h e e x t r e m e v a l u e o f t h e measured r u n o f f o f t h e same exceedance probability and the coaxial-diagram was (slightly) a d j u s t e d t o i m p r o v e agreement. The data c o l l e c t i o n continued throughout t h e p l a n n i n g s t a g e , and f l o o d s were used t o v e r i f y u n i t hydrographs (usually with little need of adjustment), i n p a r t i c u l a r a major flood i n 1978 w h i c h p r o v e d t o b e a n e v e n t whose p r o b a b i l i t y o f being exceeded was a b o u t o n c e i n 50 y e a r s .

M e t e o r o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e and t h e s t a t e Water A u t h o r i t i e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y . I t m i g h t be i n t e r e s t i n g t o p o n d e r the history of these networks : c e r t a i n l y t h e i r o r i g i n a t o r s had no n o t i o n o f t h e purposes f o r which t h e d a t a b a s i s i s b e i n g used t o d a y .

Question 70:
The p r o j e c t s e r v e d t o d e v e l o p a hydrological method of flood calculations for mu 1 t i s it e reservoirs. The method c o n s i s t e d o f adapting an a r e a r a i n f a l l - r u n o f f model t o t h e S u l m a r e a , by u s i n g t h e unit hydrographs regionalized d e s c r i b e d above f o r each o f the r e s e r v o i r s w h i c h were l o c a t e d on tributaries, and b y u s i n g l i n e a r flood routing for the r i v e r parts between t h e r e s e r v o i r s on t h e main river. M o d e l s o f t h i s k i n d had b e e n developed i n d i f f e r e n t parts of the FGR (Schultz 141, B o g a r d i e t a l . 151, S c h r o e d e r and E u l e r 161. 4.

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

The p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s in t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c a s e were g i v e n by d if f erent combinations of reservoirs, with only reservoir B r e i t e n a u used a l s o f o r low f l o w was augmentation. Cons i d e r a t i o n g i v e n t o use t h e low f l o w s t o r a g e f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l purposes, although t h e o p i n i o n s o n t h i s were m i x e d . A l t h o u g h i t was realized that the area would b e n e f i t economically t o some e x t e n t , due t o t h e p u r c h a s i n g power o f v i s i t o r s , t h e r e were f e a r s , experiences i n nearby born out of regions, that t h e v i s i t o r s would p l a c e a burden on t h e environment, and t h a t t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f p a r k i n g zones, beaches, and t h e l i k e w o u l d c o s t more t h a n w o u l d be g a i n e d by the region i n particular since m o s t v i s i t o r s w o u l d come f r o m n e a r b y l a r g e c i t i e s l o c a t e d o u t s i d e of t h e region. However, because i t was f e l t that t h e r e s e r v o i r would be used recreationally anyway, the to establish d e c i s i o n was made, recreational facilities at the But no d e t a i l e d b e n e f i t - c o s t lakes. analysis or any o t h e r planning

Question 8:
No OR t e c h n i q u e s were u s e d t o determine the method of data collection, but the unusually large amount o f a v a i l a b l e d a t a t r i g g e r e d a number o f s t u d i e s : o n t h e optimum contro1 of flood protection reservoirs 131, on t h e d e n s i t y o f networks required for flood p r o t e c t i o n work, on t h e accuracy o f r a i n f a l l d e t e r m i n a t i o n from networks of different density. However, t h e study i t s e l f d i d n o t r e q u i r e OR techniques i n t h e data analysis stage other t h a n l e a s t squares a n a l y s e s used f o r c u r v e f i t t i n g s .

Question 9:
The o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n o f the study d i d n o t r e q u i r e c r i t e r i a data. In particular, d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n o f t h e s t u d y were not coordinated. As has been s t a t e d before: there e x i s t i n Germany networks of r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f gages w h i c h a r e o p e r a t e d by t h e

i n s t r u m e n t was u s e d t o s u p p o r t the decision. The answers t o p e r t i n e n t questions of t h i s section refer to the alternative combinations of reservoirs only.

t o buy an e x p e n s i v e r e s e r v o i r . The dec i s i o n on the f eas i b 1 e alternatives were d i s c u s s e d between t h e IWK and t h e l o c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e SWA.

Questions 7 7 and 12.

The alternatives were investigated by the h y d r o l o g i s t s o f the University o f Karlsruhe. In p a r t supported by s t a t e funds f o r t h e p r o j e c t , and p a r t l y b y r e s e a r c h money from the German S c i e n c e Associations, a number o f staff members w o r k e d o u t t h e p r o g r a m s . A l l i n a l l , a t o t a l o f a b o u t 6 man y e a r s were u s e d , o f which o n l y a fraction of a b o u t 9 man months was used f o r the actual project, the r e s t b e i n g used f o r r e s e a r c h . The of the computer faci 1 it i e s are University of Kar 1 s r u h e available, free of c h a r g e , as t h e University provides t h i s service f o r r e s e a r c h and s i n c e t h e U n i v e r s i t y i s a state institution, other state i n s t i t u t i o n s l i k e t h e L W A c a n be serviced by the University ( i n t h i s c a s e by t h e IWK)

Question 15:
The h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e was f a i r l y simple. Since t h e s t r u c t u r e o f the d e c i s i o n process i s s e t by law, the d e c i s i o n r e s t s w i t h the d i s t r i c t b o a r d w h i c h i s a d v i s e d by t h e SWA. The IWK and t h e l o c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e SWA t o g e t h e r worked o u t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be s u b j e c t e d t o d e t a i l e d s t u d y and t h e ones t o be p r e s e n t e d t o t h e e c h e l o n s of t h e SWA. The f i n a l p r o j e c t p l a n was d e v e l o p e d i n a j o i n t m e e t i n g o f IWK, all l e v e l s of t h e SWA w i t h interest in the case, and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e FPD.

Question 16:
Already discussed i n q u e s t i o n 10 answering

Questions 77 and 18:

The method employed was s i mu 1 a t i on by means o f des i gn d i f f e r e n t exceedance r a i n f a l l s of probability. The r e s u l t s o f each a l t e r n a t i v e were s c r u t i n i z e d b y t h e p l a n n i n g team, and t h e a l t e r n a t i v e was selected which seemed, by intuition, t o meet m o s t o f the p u r p o s e s and c o n s t r a i n t s . There was no OR method employed i n t h e decision process.

Question 73:
A t t h i s stage o f the planning process, no direct citizen But participation took place. i n d i r e c t l y , o f course, t h e c i t i z e n s had a l r e a d y r e s t r i c t e d t h e p o s s i b l e s i t e s and s i z e s o f the reservoirs, which were entered as fixed q u a n t i t i e s i n t h e planning process. it was possible f o r the Thus m o d e l l e r t o r e d u c e t h e s i z e or t h r o w of the out altogether some r e s e r v o i r s , b u t n o t t o i n c r e a s e them nor t o select new and a d d i t i o n a l locations.

Question 79:
A l t h o u g h t h e S W A and t h e FPD share the responsibility for proposing t h e f i n a l project, the recommendations a r e m o s t l y t h o s e of t h e model b u i l d e r (IWK). The r e a s o n i s t h a t the U n i v e r s i t y i s considered most q u a l i f i e d t o s o l v e complex p l a n n i n g problems. The d e c i s i o n t o implement t h e s t u d y i s made b y t h e F P D w i t h f i n a l a p p r o v a l r e q u i r e d by the responsible ministry before a c t u a l c o n s t r u c t i o n , as i s d e s c r i b e d i n connection w i t h question 27 below.

Question 14:
A t o t a l o f 7 a l t e r n a t i v e s were investigated. The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e study w e r e t o o b t a i n a maximum protection a t the least incremental cost. For example, i f b y b u i l d i n g an a d d i t i o n a l reservoir the flood d o w n s t r e a m c o u l d b e changed b y o n l y a few p e r c e n t , i t was c o n s i d e r e d more u s e f u l t o i n c r e a s e t h e c a p a c i t y of the creeks s l i g h t l y r a t h e r than

Question 20:
Most o f t h e p l a n n e r s were c i v i l engineers o r h y d r a u l i c engineers. However, through the hearing mentioned i n q u e s t i o n 27, e x p e r t s o f o t h e r agencies a r e included, but t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s a r e made m o s t l y d u r i n g t h e p l a n n i n g stage 4.

5. Planning Stage 4: Development of Final Project Specifications

Whereas s t a g e 3 w a s d e s i g n e d t o selecting the give a basis for a l t e r n a t i v e s most l i k e l y t o s a t i s f y t h e o b j e c t i v e s , s t a g e 4 i s concerned w i t h the d e t a i l e d investigation of the f i n a l plan. I t m u s t be r e a l i z e d t h a t stage 3 i s a stage i n which n o t all t h e d a t a a r e used, n o r a r e a l l n e c e s s a r y c a l c u l a t i o n s made. In stage 3 o n l y those aspects a r e covered which v a r y from a l t e r n a t i v e to alternative, and the f i n a l d e c i s i o n f o r s t a g e 3 i s made n o t o n t h e d e t a i l e d p l a n , b u t on t h e b a s i s o f p r e l i m i n a r y drawings. The aspects which are investigated i n stage 4 are f i r s t the determination of operation rules, then the evaluation o f the system under a given set of operation rules for floods of d if f e r e n t recurrence intervals. Finally, t h e optimum sequence o f building of the reservoirs was d e c i d e d on.

Question 21:

OR methods w e r e employed f o r d e t e r m i n i n g t h e optimum o p e r a t i o n rules. I t was assumed t h a t t h e hydrological model described in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h q u e s t i o n 10 p r o v i d e d t h e f l o o d waves f o r w h i c h t h e s y s t e m to operate optimally. had Originally, an a c t i v e c o n t r o l was e n v i s a g e d b y means o f w h i c h t h e o p e r a t i o n o f a l l r e s e r v o i r s was t o be c o n t r o l 1 ed. The objective f u n c t i o n c h o s e n was t h e o p e r a t i o n w h i c h m i n i m i z e d t h e f l o o d peaks o f t h e f l o o d wave r e l e a s e d f r o m t h e r e s e r v o i r ( P l a t e and S c h u l t z 131).

The method was o r i g i n a l l y b a s e d but in a on t w o r e s e r v o i r s o n l y , l a t e r s t u d y (Meyer-Zurwel l e d 1 7 ; ) i t was e x t e n d e d t o u p t o 16 r e s e r v o i r s . I n c r e m e n t a l d y n a m i c p r o g r a m m i n g was 4 u s e d , and a p p l i e d t o a g r o u p o f r e s e r v o i r s each o f which being a lumped g r o u p o f u p t o 4 r e s e r v o i r s . The o p e r a t i o n o f t h e lumped g r o u p was f i r s t d e t e r m i n e d a s if it c o n s i s t e d o f a s i n g l e r e s e r v o i r , and afterwards the optimization w i t h i n t h e 4 r e s e r v o i r s o f t h e lumped g r o u p was made w i t h t h e s h a r e o f t h e f l o o d a l l o t t e d t o t h e group d u r i n g the f i r s t optimization step forming the c o n s t r a i n t s t o t h e subproblem. The improved o p e r a t i o n o f t h e g r o u p t h e n was o n c e more lumped and i t e r a t i v e l y t h e problem o f 4 lumped r e s e r v o i r g r o u p s and t h e p r o b l e m of the distribution of floods w i t h i n the g r o u p s was s o l v e d u n t i l further iterations b r o u g h t no a d d i t i o n a l improvement. I t turned out t h a t the g a i n i n system p e r f o r m a n c e o f a 16 reservoir s y s t e m as compared t o a s y s t e m i n w h i c h each r e s e r v o i r is operated independently o f a l l others was r a t h e r small, because o f t h e s m a l l s i z e o f t h e c a t c h m e n t and t h e s h o r t d i s t a n c e s between r e s e r v o i r s . Recent r e s e a r c h in the Federal Republic o f Germany i s d i r e c t e d t o f i n d i n g o p e r a t i n g r u l e s t h a t work adoptively on the basis o f a r a i n f a l l f o r e c a s t and t h e f o r e c a s t of hydrograph parameters. Radar methods a r e b e i n g employed f o r the rainfall f o r e c a s t s (Schultz, Anderl I 8 I ) . Real t i m e r u n o f f et al. f o r e c a s t s a r e developed on t h e b a s i s o f Kalman f i l t e r s . However, the results are not yet satisfactory enough t o y i e l d methods f o r s y s t e m s as s m a l l a s t h e one d e s c r i b e d , and t h e r e e x i s t s some d o u b t t h a t i t w i l l ever be u s e f u l t o use f o r e c a s t s f o r a s y s t e m t h a t needs t o b e o p e r a t e d o p t i m a l l y once o n t h e a v e r a g e e v e r y 30 t o 100 y e a r s . W i t h t h i s i n mind, a d i f f e r e n t method was employed b y f i n d i n g o p e r a t i o n r u l e s based o n t h e o u t 1e t hydraulics of usua 1 structures and s p i 1 lways for r e s e r v o i r s w h i c h a r e s e t permanent i n s u c h a way t h a t t h e systems 100 p e r f o r m a n c e u n d e r t h e s e t of y e a r s d e s i g n f l o o d s was as c l o s e as

-86-

p o s s i b l e t o t h e optimum. f o u n d b y t r i a l and e r r o r .

This

was

Operations research methods w e r e a l s o u s e d t o d e c i d e t h e optimum sequence of construction. The original idea was to optimize sequence and s c h e d u l i n g i n such a way t h a t s a v i n g s due t o p o s t p o n e m e n t of construction were b a 1 anced a g a i n s t p o s s i b l e losses i n c u r r e d i f a f l o o d w o u l d happen b e f o r e t h e reservoir was completed. This problem was formulated and a solution developed based on branch-and-bound t e c h n i q u e s (Bogardi 19;). However, there were two handicaps which prevented the execution of t h i s programme: the l a c k o f economic d a t a o n l o s s e s , and t h e f i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s imposed o n the construction, f o r which the s t a t e has s e t a s i d e a constant amount e v e r y y e a r w i t h t h e t o t a l t o be expended after 10 years. T h e r e f o r e , t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n on t h e sequence was made o n t h e b a s i s o f efficiency of flood protection a t the c r i t i c a l point ( t h e Audi-NSU automobile works in the c i t y of N e c k a r s u l m a t t h e mouth o f t h e Sulm river): those r e s e r v o i r s were b u i l t first, which brought t h e largest flood protection gain a t t h a t point. I n case o f equal b e n e f i t , a series of other critical p o i n t s were centers or identified ( v i 1 lage i n d u s t r i a l a r e a s on p a r t s o f the Sulm or i t s t r i b u t a r i e s w i t h small f l o o d c h a n n e l s ) and t h a t reservoir p l a c e d f i r s t i n t h e sequence o f t h e remaining r e s e r v o i r s which would cause maximum b e n e f i t s a t other c r i t i c a l points. T h e r e i s no q u e s t i o n t h a t a l l t h e methods employed had b e e n used before. However, t h e p r o b l e m had n o t b e e n p o s e d i n t h e same f o r m s o t h a t most o f t h e e x i s t i n g methods had t o be a d a p t e d , and no a l g o r i t h m e x i s t e d which c o u l d be employed straightforwardly, except o f course s u c h r o u t i n e programs as u s e d f o r matrix calculations. I t seems t o us i n similar situations only the that l o g i c a s employed by u s i s f e a s i b l e : t o generate, on the basis of hydrological models, families of f l o o d h y d r o g r a p h s , f o r each o f w h i c h

the reservoir system's optimum o p e r a t i o n r u l e s b a s e d on p e r f e c t f o r e c a s t s a r e found. These r u l e s a r e t h e n a n a l y s e d t o f i n d t h e ones which would yield the best non-adoptive o p e r a t i n g r u l e s . There maybe d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e methods o f a n a l y s i s due to the situation encountered and the d a t a base available (but a hydrologic data base as e x t e n s i v e as t h e one used for the present studies i s usually a not required. Unfortuntely detailed analysis o f the required s i z e o f a network f o r small areas i s s t i l l not available). '

Question 22:
No c o s t b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s was made. I n any case, i t i s f e l t t h a t the basic decision o f b u i l d i n g the s y s t e m has l i t t l e t o do w i t h c o s t b e n e f i t , s i n c e a l t e r n a t i v e ways o f flood protection (object protection, flood insurance) m i g h t be most c o s t effective. More i m p o r t a n t a r e t h e of t h e pub1 i c and t h e concern of funds. F lood avai l a b i 1 i t y p r o t e c t i o n i n t h e FRG i s a p o l i t i c a l i s s u e on t h e one hand, and a m a t t e r o f economics on t h e o t h e r hand. Economics e n t e r f o r example i f an i n d u s t r i a l p l a n t i s t o be l o c a t e d i n a f l o o d prone area. But i t should be mentioned t h a t t h e F e d e r a l Water Law r e q u i r e s t h a t all p r o j e c t s be s u b j e c t e d t o a c o s t benefit analysis. Because o f this requirement, one of the most intensive area of f l o o d research i n is t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e economic s i d e o f f l o o d s (Buck e t a l . , 19;). There a r e a number o f r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s i n t h i s area, and a t t e m p t s a r e b e i n g made by d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s t o o b t a i n t h e n e c e s s a r y f u n d s t o c o n d u c t case studies.

Question 23:
Neither risk analysis nor impact analysis was performed. German a u t h o r i t i e s c o n s i d e r that r i s k analysis i s not required for p u b l i c w a t e r works i f t h e s t a n d a r d s ( D I N 19700) a r e met. However, t h e r e i s a t p r e s e n t c o n s i d e r a b l e concern

-87-

t o p r o v i d e a u n i f i e d b a s i s of risk analysis f o r a l l p u b l i c works. The F e d e r a l M i n i s t r y o n Research and Technology i s s p o n s o r i n g a r e s e a r c h program on r i s k a n a l y s i s , and f i r s t a t t e m p t s have been made t o p r o v i d e a framework of risk analysis appl i c a b l e to flood protection reservoirs on the basis of r e l i a b i l i t y theory (Plate I 11 I . An environmental i mpac t a n a l y s i s has n o t been p e r f o r m e d . The r e s e r v o i r s a r e b l e n d e d i n t o t h e landscape, landscape a r c h i t e c t u r e i s heavily employed. Water quality problems a r i s e o n l y i n c o n t e x t w i t h the recreationally filled be r e s e r v o i r s , and a program w i l l s e t up b y t h e SWA and t h e FPO t o s u r v e y and i f n e c e s s a r y c o n t r o l the In fact, the q u a l i t y of t h e w a t e r . usefulness o f t h i s s u r v e y became o b v i o u s soon a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e reservoir Breitenau, i n which a s h a l l o w a r e a was found e u t r o p i e d a f t e r a f e w months, and w h i c h had t o be deepened by additional excavation. However, this i s not of the plannng. Other part environmental concerns, voiced a t t h e h e a r i n g m e n t i o n e d i n q u e t i o n 27 c o u l d b e met i n t h e f i n a l d e s i g n stage. As a r e s u l t o f o b j e c t i o n s by environmentalists, one of the r e s e r v o i r s was e l i m i n a t e d t o p r o t e c t a w e t l a n d area. Also archeologists expected t o f i n d t r a c e s o f ancient s e t t l e m e n t s a t some o f t h e s i t e s , and s p e c i a l c a r e was used d u r i n g e x c a v a t i o n s , b u t n o t h i n g was f o u n d .

Question 26:
The d e c i s i o n made f o l l o w e d t o t h e l e t t e r t h e recommendation o f t h e IWK. This i s because t h e f i n a l report i n w h i c h t h e recommendations w e r e put down was prepared in A first c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e SWA. d r a f t was s e n t t o them f o r comments, i f t h e y f e l t t h a t t h e y were u n a b l e to accept one of the recommendations. A compromise was f o u n d i n w h i c h t h e h y d r o l o g y was n o t q u e s t i o n e d b u t a r e d u c t i o n was made 1 oca 1 1 y o f exceedance p r o b a b i 1 i t y for the flood returned by the reservoir according t o the value o f t h e p r o p e r t i e s i n the flooded area. No OR t e c h n i q u e s w e r e u s e d f o r t h i s .

Question 27:
Approval t o t h e f i n a l plan i s given by the county administrator (Landrat) on t h e b a s i s of the p l a n s s u b m i t t e d and a p p r o v e d by t h e FPD. The L a n d r a t ' s a p p r o v a l i s g i v e n f o r e a c h r e s e r v o i r s e p a r a t e l y , and o n l y i f t h e r e a r e no o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e p r o j e c t from other p o t e n t i a l users, which m i g h t be p r i v a t e p a r t i e s o r other Government agencies l i k e t h e S t a t e Highway D e p a r t m e n t o r the Department of Environmental Protection. I n order t o coordinate a l l objections, a public hearing i s conducted (ca 1 1 ed "Planfests t u l l u n g s v e r f a h r e n " or " P r o c e d u r e o f f i n a l i z i n g t h e Plan") i n w h i c h t h e county a d m i n i s t r a t o r (Landrat) or a more d i r e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the r e s p o n s i b l e m i n i s t r y (of Environment and A g r i c u l t u r e ) i s t r y i n g t o s e t t l e a l l open q u e s t i o n s and t o d e c i d e o n pending issues. A t t h i s hearing, the public is invited, and a l l o b j e c t i o n s c a n be v o i c e d b y anyone. The s t a t e c a n r e f u t e o r c o n f i r m t h e o b j e c t i o n upon h e a r i n g o f expert witnesses. If all objections are met, t h e p l a n i s a c c e p t e d ; i f some o f t h e o b j e c t i o n s a r e n o t met b u t overruled by the o f f i c i a l , the p l a n i s a l s o accepted, b u t t h e o v e r r u l i n g m i g h t be appealed t o a c o u r t , which i s independent o f t h e m i n i s t r y .

Question 24:
The s e l e c t i o n o f t h e f i n a l p l a n has a l r e a d y been made i n p r i n c i p l e a t t h e end o f s t a g e 3. Here, o n l y t h e f i n a l o p e r a t i o n r u l e s and f i n a l s i z e s w e r e d e t e r m i n e d , w h i c h was m o s t l y a t e c h n i c a l m a t t e r dec d e d by in consultation w t h the t h e SWA IWK. S m a l l changes o c c u r r e d n t h e d e s i g n s t a g e f o l l o w i n g stage 4. b u t t h e y were d e a l t w i t h l o c a l l y .

Question 28:
F u n d i n g was done t h r o u g h a p a r t o f t h e b u d g e t earmarked f o r flood protection. T h i s i s d i s t r i b u t e d by t h e r e s p o n s i b l e m i n i s t r y over all projects in the state of Baden-Wurttemberg, according t o a l i s t of p r i o r i t y worked o u t i n t h e ministry. The present project DM p e r y e a r , r e c e i v e s about 2 M i l l . and construction must progress funds. according t o a v a i l a b i l i t y of The total construction w i l l be c o m p l e t e d i n 1990.

Question 29:
Due t o t h e a l e r t n e s s and t h e personal interest of the local representative of the SWA, the project i s c l o s e l y s u p e r v i s e d and improved t h r o u g h l o c a l e f f o r t s . An a u t o m a t i c f l o o d w a r n i n g system i s being installed. And a f t e r each flood (in particularly after the 1978 f l o o d ) a c a r e f u l e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e system performance i s carried out, including a recalculation of t h e h y d r o l o g y a f t e r t h e 1978 f l o o d b y t h e IWK.

b u i l d ng t h e r e s e r v o i r s was d e c i d e d . With this information, t h e SWA usual y would make a limited compe i t i o n , inviting renowned the c o n s u l t i n g f i r m s t o b i d on design, and o n t h e s u p e r v i s i o n o f the construction. The s u c c e s s f u l bidder then would prepare the d r a w i n g s , s u b j e c t t o a p p r o v a l by t h e SWA, and the c o n s t r u c t i o n was In the initiated thereafter. present case, t h e SWA had t h e e x p e r i e n c e and t h e man-power t o do t h e designs itself, and b i d s w e r e r e q u e s t e d on t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o n l y . The system i s under c o n s t r u c t i o n , a total o f 5 r e s e r v o i r s have been b u i l t , and t h e p a r t i a l l y c o m p l e t e d system, containing the biggest reservoir (Breitenau), a l r e a d y had i t s f i r s t s u c c e s s when a n e x t r e m e flood (exceedance p r o b a b i l i t y in some l o c a l i t i e s o f once i n 70 o r more y e a r s ) o c c u r r e d i n 1978. In fact, calculations after t h i s e v e n t have shown t h a t i f t h e Audi-NSU w o r k s had b e e n s u b j e c t e d t o t h e same f l o o d w i t h t h e r e s e r v o i r s y s t e m e x i s t i n g i n 1970, t h e damage a t t h i s l o c a t i o n a l o n e w o u l d have b e e n 90 M i l l i o n OM - e x c e e d i n g t h e c o s t o f t h e system by about a f a c t o r o f 8.

6 Planning Design

Stage

5:

Project

Question 30:
The p l a n n i n g r e s u l t s - i n c l u d e d : the reservoirs, the the sizes o f operation rules f o r the reservoirs, t h e maximum d i s c h a r g e s i n t h e r i v e r s and cana 1 s c o n n e c t i ng the reservoirs. A l s o , t h e sequence o f

Acknowledgement
The s u c c e s s o f t h e p r o j e c t is i n l a r g e p a r t due t o t h e e f f o r t s o f t h e l o c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e SWA, Mr. H. Trost, Waserwirtschaftsamt H e i l b r o n n . He a l s o p r o v i d e d many d e t a i l s o f t h i s r e p o r t .

References
Mosonyi et al. 1979 111 E. "Empf eh 1 ungen fur die Ber ec hnungen der E Hochwasserwahrscheinlichkeit (Recommenda t i o n for the calculation of flood probabilities) Committee on Des i gn F 1 oods, DVWK (German Water Resources Assoc .) Recommendation N r . 101 Bauch 1971 Seus and W . 121 G.J. "On t h e optimization of the s t o r a g e areas a t design of river dams" Proc. 14. Congress I n t e r v a l 1 Assoc. of H y d r a u l i c Research, P a r i s V o l . 5 pp. 263-292. Schultz 131 E . P l a t e and G . A . 1972 " F l o o d C o n t r o l P o l i c i e s Development b y Simulation". 2 nd Intern. P r o c e e d i ngs Hydrology Symposium, Fort Col 1 i ns, USA, pp. 246-258.

171

J . M e y e r - Z u r w e l l e 1973" O p t i m u m r e l e a s e s t r a t e g i e s f o r systems of flood protection In: Research reservo irs" and p r a c t i c e i n t h e water environment. Proc. of thg XV. IAHR Congrtess, I s t a n b u l 1973. V o l . 4, pp. 205-214.

181 B .

Ander I, W. Attmannspacher, G.A. Schultz 1976 " A c c u r a c y o f r e s e r v o i r inflow forecasts based o n r a d a r r a i n f a l l measurements". In: Water R e s o u r c e s R e s e a r c h , Vol. 12, No. 2, PP. 2 17-223.

191 J . J .

141 M.

B i m a r k , J. Bogardi, and 1979 "An E.J. Plate and Integrated Channe 1 R e s e r v o i r R o u t i n g Model U s i n g Generated Mu 1 t i s i t e P r e c i p i t a t i o n D a t a as I n p u t " In: Hydraulic Engineering i n Water R e s o u r c e s Development and Management. Proceedings, 1 8 t h IAHR Congress, C a g l i a r i , I t a l y , Vol. 5 , pp. 287-294.

Branch B o g a r d i 1979 " A and Bound A l g o r i t h m t o F i n d O p t i m a l C o n s t r u c t i o n Sequence f o r Flood Control Reservoirs". In: Hydraulic Engineering i n Water Resources Development and Management. Proc. 18th I AHR Congress, Cagl i a r i , I t a l y , Vol. 2 , pp. 55-62. W.Buch, J. K l a u s and R . F . Schmidtke (ed i t o r ) 1983,"Wasserwirtschaftliche Projektbewer tung (Eva1 u a t i o n o f water resources projects) Report publ ished by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research As soc i a t i on) Comm i s s i o n on Water R e s e a r c h , M i t t e i l u n g N r .

!lo!

".

151

G.A. S c h u l t z 1968 "Bestimmung t h e o r e t i scher Abflussganglinien durch e l e k t r o n i s c h e Berechnung v o n N i e d e r s c h l a g s k o n z e n t r a t i o n und Retention (HYREUN-Verf a h r e n ) Ber i c h t Nr. 11 der V e r s u c h s a n s t a l t f u r Wasserbau der T.U. Munchen.

5.
1 1 1 1 E.J. P l a t e 1984 " R e l i a b i l i t y a n a l y s i s o f dam s a f e t y " in "Frontiers in Hydrology: (L.E. B e a r d and W. Hal 1 Maxwel 1 : editors) Water.. resources publ i c a t i o n s pp. 288-304.

161 R .

CH. Schroder 1974 "Detaillierte hydrologische Model l e fur instationare Niederschlag-Abfluss Modelle" Die Bautechnik 1974, pp. 30 1-306.

DEVELOPMENT OF WATER SUPPLY SCHEMES IN THE EASTERN NEGEV, ISRAEL: GENERAL DESCRIPTION

D. ALKAN, Tahal Consulting Engineers Limited Israel October 1982

1.

Introduction

The E a s t e r n Negev r e g i o n c o v e r s kilometres of some 2500 s q u a r e desert land i n South o f I s r a e l . It is characterized by 1 arge d i f f e r e n c e s o f a l t i t u d e between + l 5 O m above m.s.1. i n t h e w e s t a n d +600 i n the east. The r e g i o n i n c l u d e s f i v e towns (160,000 inhabitants) , thirteen villages with extensively i r r ig a t e d agr i c u l t u r e , two i n d u s t r i a l centers, mainly chemical, and two phosphate mines. The c l i m a t e of t h e r e g i o n i s a r i d (less t h a n 200 mm r a i n p . a . ) , t h u s w a t e r r e q u i r e m e n t s o f a l l user s e c t o r s a r e r e l a t i v e l y high, with a peaking distribution. The a r e a i s a t p r e s e n t in a r a p i d p r o c e s s o f d e v e l o p m e n t and t h e annual w a t e r demand i s e x p e c t e d t o d o u b l e - f r o m a b o u t 50 MCM at present t o a b o u t 100 MCM a t t h e end A major i n c r e a s e i s o f t h e decade. e x p e c t e d i n i n d u s t r i a l and m u n i c i p a l f r e s h w a t e r demand. The w a t e r supplied to the r e g i o n comes from t h r e e s o u r c e s : Import o f water from the n o r t h v i a the national water s u p p l y system (25% a t p r e s e n t ) , l o c a l g r o u n d w a t e r (65%) and r e c l a i m e d e f f l u e n t s f r o m l o c a l sewage. Fresh water i s being s u p p l i e d b y two s e p a r a t e p i p e l i n e systems, one f e d b y l o c a l ground w a t e r and the other by t h e n a t i o n a l system.

B o t h s y s t e m s convey w a t e r eastwards through l o n g l i n e s and a s e r i e s o f pumping s t a t i o n s t o overcome t h e l o n g d i s t a n c e s and l a r g e a l t i t u d e differences. The w a t e r supply development p l a n was e x p e c t e d t o a d d r e s s t h e f o l l o w i n g issues: a The d vision of supply b e tween l o c a l and i m p o r t e d sources (annua 1 and seasona 1 .

development and b . The possibility of interc o n n e c t i o n between the two systems. c . The sequencing development in time space. d.
Qf and

The s e a s o n a l variation in the operation of the integrated regional supply system.

S a l i n e g r o u n d w a t e r and sewage effluents a r e a l s o used i n t h e region, and are part of the development plan. However, i n t h e f o l l o w i n g o n l y t h e development of t h e f r e s h water system used f o r domestic, i n d u s t r i a l and i r r i g a t i o n purposes w i l l be d i s c u s s e d . The r e s u l t i n g plan is an integrated water s u p p l y scheme, connecting a l l the sources and

-92-

users. Previous plans divided the area i n t o separate water supply schemes: mainly the northern branch and t h e s o u t h e a s t e r n b r a n c h . The investments required to expand t h e e x i s t i n g scheme t o t h e "1990 level" are estimated at $20,000,000.

beyond t h e economical efficiency, such as maintaining existing and promotion of a c t iv i t i e s economical activities, daily life and a m e n i t i e s i n t h e r e g i o n , were o n l y i m p l i c i t l y considered.

Question 4
Three m a i n t y p e s o f c o n s t r a i n t s were p o s e d :

2. Planning Stage 1: Project Initiation and Preliminary Planning

Question 1
The p l a n was to f i t i n t o an o v e r a l l master p l a n f o r t h e r e g i o n , in which the development of settlements, population, a g r i c u l t u r e and i n d u s t r y were l a i d o u t and integrated. Such m a s t e r p l a n does not exist explicitly. Sectorial p l a n s f o r a g r i c u l t u r e , i n d u s t r y and municipal development could be c o n s i d e r e d as a p l a n n i n g f r a m e w o r k . The p u r p o s e o f t h e p r o j e c t was t o p r e p a r e a 20 y e a r plan for the d e v e l o p m e n t and e x p a n s i o n o f a w a t e r s u p p l y system w h i c h e x i s t s i n p a r t s of t h e r e g i o n .

a.

A given forecast o f w a t e r demands

consumers'

b. L i m i t e d p r o d u c t i o n p o t e n t i a l o f local sources and limited capacity o f t h e n a t i o n a l water s u p p l y system. c . The 1 i m i ted capability of the systems. a. hydraul ic existing

The problem of demand forecasting was d i f f i c u l t f o r a number o f r e a s o n s :

Question 2
The p l a n was p r e p a r e d b y TAHAL. which i s t h e n a t i o n a l water p l a n n i n g author i t y Two W.R. s y s tems engineers, one programmer and o n e s t u d e n t worked i n t h e s t u d y .

For industrial uses the development plan and s c h e d u l e were u n c e r t a i n , and the water qual it y requirements not clearly enough d e f i n e d . For m u n i c i p a l u s e s t h e m a i n p r o b l e m was t h e gap between the optimists and the pessimists concerning the p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h and pace o f p h y s i c a l development. For a g r i c u l t u r a l uses t h e f u t u r e cropping patterns are hardly predictable and therefore the t o t a l demand as well as the time distribution of t h e annual a l l o c a t i o n and peak demand are dubious.

Water s u p p l y i n I s r a e l i s the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f n a t i o n a l agencies, which r e p r e s e n t t h e i n t e r e s t s of a l l consumers and t h e p u b l i c a t l a r g e . T h e r e f o r e , n o need was seen f o r the public as such t o p a r t i c i p a t e . However, representatives of the consumers, especially farmers, voiced t h e i r c o n c e r n s and o p i n i o n s o n v a r i o u s o c c a s i o n s , and t h u s had an input t o the planning process. The i n i t i a t i o n of planning was required by local consumer organizations.

Question 3
The s i n g l e o b j e c t i v e o f the to fully supply the p l a n was i n c r e a s i n g w a t e r demand a t t h e l e a s t overall cost. Decision c r i t e r i a

b . The p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t r a i n t s o f t h e n a t i o n a l system a r e t w o f o l d : the in nationwide s c a r c i t y of water the system and the limited pipeline c a p a c i t y o f a 42" D i a . wi 11 be (Zohar-Zel im) which s u p p l y i n g some 3000 capable o f c.m.h. to the region, as compared t o a peak demand o f The 1 oca 1 13000 c.m.h.

-93-

groundwater sources a r e l i m i t e d by a safe yield which is estimated a t 35 MCM and t h e local l i m i t e d c a p a c i t y o f 20 wells which are capable o f p r o d u c i n g a t o t a l o f 5000 c.m.h. The n a t i o n a l h y d r o l o g i c a l s e r v i c e was involved i n estimating the safe y i e l d . c. The existing pip1 ines and pumping s t a t i o n s l i m i t t h e conveying capacities i n a p a r t o f t h e l i n k s i n t h e system.

c o n s i d e r a t i o n as a s l o w g r o w t h r a t e i n t h e per c a p i t a use, t y p i c a l f o r e a c h t o w n a c c o r d i n g t o i t s s i z e and present standard o f services. Peak month r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r the future are somewhat higher than the e x i s t i n g as a s a f e t y f a c t o r . I n d u s t r i a l f u t u r e consumption i s based o n e x i s t i n g development and their specific s c e n a r i os quantity and time qual it y , d i s t r i b u t i o n requirements. A g r i c u l t u r a l f u t u r e consumption i s based o n e x i s t i n g development schemes, w h i c h i n c l u d e t h e g r o w t h o f sewage availability. Existing a g r i c u l t u r e w i l l c a r r y on w i t h t h e existing annual and peak m o n t h allocations. New v i l l a g e s w i l l be based on a basic freshwater allocation (0.7MCM) and t h e r e s t will be s u p p l i e d from reclaimed sewage and s a l i n e w a t e r s o u r c e s . The estimate c a p a c i t y was based r e c o r d e d f l o w s and capacities. of existing o n t h e maximum n o t on r a t e d

Question 5
The existing water supply systems have been d e s i g n e d p a r t w i s e . The introduction of O.R. and systems . eng i n e e r i ng has been accompanied b y a l o n g d i s p u t e , an end t o w h i c h was p u t by t h e f i n a l report only. A l o n g t h e work itself there was an argument o f the p r e f e r i n g o f a "snapshot model" which deals w i t h the h y d r a u l i c variables i n greater detail, or a " t i me expans i on" mode 1 wh i c h dea 1 s a l s o w i t h l o n g t e r m e x p a n s i o n and economical preferences along the time axis. Finally a "time e x p a n s i o n model" has been p r e f e r r e d and p o s t f a c t u m examined more d e e p l y b y t h e means o f a " s n a p s h o t model" a t two d e c i s i v e t i m e p o i n t s .

The h y d r o l o g i c c o n s t r a i n t s w e r e a r e s u l t o f a r e g i o n a l model-aided geohydrologic1 study.

Question 7. Question 8. Question 9. Question 10.

Yes Yes

3. Planning Stage 2: Collection & Processing

Question 6

Data

No
No

Annual, peak and 1ow c o n s u m p t i o n d a t a h a v e been c o l l e c t e d for t h e p a s t y e a r s from "Mekorot" company d a t a base. "Mekorot" i s t h e o n l y water s u p p l i e r i n the r e g i o n . The d a t a a r e s p e c i f i e d f o r t h e t h r e e main consumer sectors i n each p r e s s u r e zone. The f u t u r e p r o j e c t i o n t e c h n i q u e was d i f f e r e n t f o r each s e c t o r : Domestic f u t u r e consumption is based on a population growth e s t i m a t e f o r each town i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h r e g i o n a l and m u n i c i p a l m a s t e r p l a n s . The l i v i n g s t a n d a r d g r o w t h factor has been taken into

4. Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

Question 1 1
Two s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r s and one programmer w o r k e d on t h e f o r m u l a t i o n of a numerical optimization s c r e e n i n g model, w h i c h i n c l u d e d a l l a p p a r e n t l y p o s s i b l e r e s o u r c e s and l i n k s i n t h e network. The MPSX L . P . Solver aided b y a M a t r i x Generator and r e p o r t w r i t e r was u s e d o n a I B M 370/158 computer. The total manpower r e q u i r e d i s e s t i m a t e d a t 1 2 man-months. With the g a i n of

e x p e r i e n c e and t h e improvement o f I .o. auxiliary programs the m o d e l i n g phase has been c o n s i d e r a b l y shortened.

Question 15
The decision-making process a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e p l a n n i n g was in four levels: (a) The p l a n n e r s 1 e v e 1 , (b) A p r o f e s s i ona 1 t e c h n i c a 1 s t e e r i ng comm i t t e e checked engineering i s s u e s and examined t h e impacts on local and o t h e r W.R. systems, (c) A h i g h e r l e v e l s t e e r i n g committee o f the National Water Commissioner's O f f i c e which d e a l t w i t h r e g i o n a l and o v e r a l l i m p a c t s o n and o t h e r systems: t h e t h e W.R. p u b l i c delegates a l s o took p a r t in that committee, (d) A statutory p l a n n i n g committee o f the Water Commissioner composed o f d e l e g a t e s f r o m p u b l i c a g e n c i e s and consumer sector representatives. The conflicts arose mainly on t h e d e v e l o p m e n t and o p e r a t i o n o f the s o u r c e s and c o n v e y i n g systems. Most o f t h e r e s o l u t i o n s were achieved in the technical level and c o n f i r m e d a f t e r w a r d s on t h e h i g h e r l e v e l s .

Question 12
The p r o j e c t was i n i t i a t e d and financed by the national water p l a n n i n g and a l l o c a t i n g a u t h o r i t i e s , i.e. t h e water commissioner and " M e k o r o t " Company. Th i s p r o j e c t was W.R. systems part of a national analysis.

Question 13
The consumers and water a u t h o r i t i e s took part i n the data collection stage. The final s o l u t i o n was n o t a c c e p t e d b y p a r t o f t h e consumers who f e l t n e g l e c t e d as most o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t was for p a r t s o f t h e system i n f a r distance f r o m them. However a c o m p r e h e n s i v e e x a m i n a t i o n shows the c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h e p l a n t o t h e w e l l b e i n g and amenity o f the majority of the population.

Question 16.
Imposed c o n s t r a i n t s :

Question 14
The m a i n a l t e r n a t i v e s of the plan are: I. The d i v i s i o n o f s u p p l y between t h e v a r i o u s sources and i t s seasonal and l o n g term The f l o w i n links variations: I I . of t h e n e t w o r k ; I l l . The t r a d e o f f i n t e n s iv e was between the development o f t h e s o u t h e r n o r t h e n o r t h e r n b r a n c h o f t h e main system, and b e t w e e n t h e s t r e n g t h e n i n g o f t h e c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e n a t i o n a l system or t h e development o f l o c a l groundwater IV. The s e q u e n c i n g o f resources; development; V. The trade-off between pipe diameter and A large booster-pump capacities. number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s had t h e r e f o r e to b e examined. Indeed i n t h e p r o p a g a t i o n towards the optimal model s e a r c h e s s o l u t i o n the L.P. t h r o u g h a l a r g e number o f feasible s o l u t i o n s which are a l l inferior "alternatives". Every i t e r a t i o n i n the s o l u t i o n process i s a d e t a i l e d inferior solution in terms o f To j u s t i f y t h e economic e f f i c i e n c y . i s possible to chosen s o l u t i o n i t exhibit some of these inferior alternatives. a. The e x i s t i n g system had t o be t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n though n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be e x p l o i t e d i n f u l l capac i t y

b. The s o u r c e s ' p o t e n t i a l was based on prior investigations. Sensitivity t e s t s h a v e been made t o t h e annual safe yield. These c o n s t r a i n t s were imposed b y t h e G.W. hydroloical experts of b o t h Tahal and t h e Water Commissioner. c. F o r e c a s t demands had t o b e satisfied. The scope o f future development o f i r r i g a t i o n a r e a s was discussed with the agricultural planning agencies. d. Q u a l i t y constraints could n o t be r e l a x e d . For a p a r t o f t h e consumers they seemed not reasonable, m a i n l y some t y p e s o f i n d u s t r y w h i c h demanded t h e b e s t quality available.

Question 17
a. A long-term development/operation developrnent/operation model has

-95-

model has been d e v e l o p e d i n T a h a l Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e 1 , f o r t h e of regional W.R. analysis systems. The model i s b a s e d on t h e L.P. technique for the optimization of t h e development r e g i o n a l W.R. and o p e r a t i o n o f sys tems

5. Planning Stage 4: Development of Final Project Specifications

Question 2 I
Based o n t h e MPSX s y s t e m f o r the s o l u t i o n o f L.P.models,a r a t h e r sophi s t i c a t e d g e n e r a l model f o r t h e l o n g systt e r m a n a l y s i s o f r e g i o n a l W.R. has been d e v e l o p e d i n t h e l a s t y e a r s . The model c a l l e d "Tekurna" (L .P. f o r W.R. systems) i s composed o f a m a t r i x g e n e r a t o r and a r e p o r t w r i t e r combined w i t h t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l MPSX system. I t serves today as an operative instrument for the l o n g - t e r m p l a n n i n g o f r e g i o n a l W.R. systems. This regional multi-sector, multi-seasonal, mu1 t i - p e r i o d , mu1 t i - s t a t e , m u l t i - q u a l i t y model i s a n outcome o f t h r e e main e f o r t s in the mid seventies: a. A national multi-regional, multi-sector, multi-seasonal s i n g l e p e r i o d L.P. model (Chayat E Vanunu - T a h a l , 1975). w h i c h combines t h e optimization of both the a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n p l a n and t h e operation of national and r e g i o n a l W.R. and s u p p l y systems. b. A national multi-sector, multi-period, multi-state, D.P. model (Schwarz, 1980). c. A regional multi-objective, mu1 t i - s e c t o r , multi-seasonal, m u l t i - p e r i o d L.P. model (Alkan f Shamir - T e c h n i o n , H a i f a , 19771, which analyzes the long term development and o p e r a t i o n of a r e g i o n a l W.R. system. T h i s work dealt with t h e E a s t e r n Negev as well, b u t c o v e r e d a l a r g e r a r e a and a wider scope o f national goals, s u c h as employment and e n v i r o n m e n t a l impacts. The g e n e r a l p u r p o s e "Tekuma" model (Schwarz, A l k a n e t a1 Tahal, 1981) was d e v e l o p e d i n t h e l a t e s e v e n t i e s and has b e e n u s e d three regions in s i n c e then for - E a s t e r n Negev, W e s t e r n Israel Negev and A r a v a V a l l e y . A t present, s u c h a model i s used f o r p l a n n i n g W.R. the long term national d e v e l o p m e n t and o p e r a t i o n , as w e l l

b.

A h y d r a u l i c n e t work s o l v e r has been u s e d i n p a r a l l e l f o r the refinement of t h e s o l u t i o n and hydraulic dimensioning. The model i s a s i m u l a t o r a n a l y z i n g a "snapshot picture" for a given set o f data. The t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e o v e r a l l development/operation scheme i n t o a detailed plan for each o f t h e development stages requires r e p e t i t i v e application of t h i s model f o r each s t a g e and f o r each season.

The n e t work s o l v e r i s b a s e d on t h e Newton-Raphson t e c h n i q u e and has been d e v e l o p e d and programmed in Water Supply and "Mekor o t h" Development Company, I s r a e l .

Question 78
B o t h m o d e l s h a v e been t e s t e d on h i s t o r i c a l d a t a , and t u r n e d o u t t o operate, however not reaching the same o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n .

Question 79
The s e l e c t i o n o f t h e f i n a l p l a n has been d i s c u s s e d b y t h e t e c h n i c a l committee, as well as b y t h e s t e e r i n g committee i n which b o t h t h e a u t h o r i t i e s and t h e p u b l i c took part. The f i n a l p l a n has a l s o been p r e s e n t e d i n consumers' c o n f e r e n c e s , which f i n a l l y confirmed i t .

Question 20
T h e r e was an interdisciplinary p l a n n i n g e f f o r t , b u t t h e m i x between W.R. p l a n n e r s and o t h e r k i n d s o f planners was not appropriate. N a t i o n a l p l a n n e r s agencies s u p p l i e d d a t a , p a r t o f w h i c h were " i n the or o f l o w r e l i a b i l i t y . The making" involvement of t h e n a t i o n a l general planning a u t h o r i t i e s (Ministry of Interior) i n t h e l o c a l W.R. system p l a n n i n g i s n o t s t r o n g enough.

as t h e p l a n n i n g part of Israel.

of

the

central

Question 22
Unit costs are included i n the model. T o t a l c o s t s a r e p r e s e n t e d as part of the results.

the central p a r t of the country t o the desert. The p u r p o s e o f t h i s transfer, in addition to the p r e v e n t i o n of d i r e c t nuisances, is the protection of t h e main f r e s h groundwater sources. The s o u t h e r n part of t h e E a s t e r n Negev i s non a q u i f e r i c and s p a r s e l y i n h a b i t e d and thus s u i t a b l e f o r industries.

Question 23
No s p e c i f i c r i s k a n a l y s i s was carried out. However, t h e d e s i g n o f reservoirs was based on s h o r t breakdown p e r i o d s o f t h e e l e c t r i c i t y s u p p l y t o pumping s t a t i o n s .

Question 26
The i n t r o d u c t i o n o f an O.R. device for p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s was somewhat p r o b l e m a t i c . The " b l a c k box" was not always rightly appreciated and a c c e p t e d b y a l l people involved. Prior to the regional analysis t h e p l a n n i n g and operation of the region was completely separate for the northern, groundwater fed Beer Sheva r e g i o n , and f o r the southern Har Hanegev r e g i o n , f e d by t h e n a t i o n a l system. The integrated regional and t h e a p p r o a c h from t h e s t a r t , solution which contradicted the " s e p a r a t i s t i c " a p p r o a c h , were r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t t o b r i n g through both p r o f e s s i n a l and s t e e r i n g c o m m i t t e e s . "Convent i ona 1 ' I d e s i gn and d i r e c t comparison o f alternatives were supplemented.

Question 24
P r e f e r r e d s o l u t i o n s were found f o r d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s o f t h e unknown parameters. The most l i k e l y value was finally selected. The trade-offs c o u l d b e examined by shadow prices of the various constraints. The o p t i m a l p l a n s u g g e s t s t h e strengthening of the northern, p o o r l y d e v e l o p e d arm and t h e c l o s i n g of t h e r e g i o n a l main system i n t o a loop. To c o n v i n c e t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l b o d i e s and above a l l t h e s o u t h e r n part consumers, a number of e c o n o m i c a l l y i n f e r i o r s o l u t i o n s were presented. The suggested development scheme f o r t h e " e i g h t i e s " consists of i n v e s t m e n t s and i t e m s l i s t e d i n t h e t a b l e enclosed h e r e a f t e r .

Question 27
The p r o c e s s o f a p p r o v a l was by t h e two l e v e l s t e e r i n g committees and f i n a l l y b y a s t a t u t o r y p l a n n i n g committee of t h e w a t e r commissioner. This i s u s u a l l y a tedious process which r e q u i r e s n o t l e s s t h a n one year a f t e r completing t h e plan. The rapidly i n c r e a s i n g demands p r e s s e d t h e decision-makers t o accept a p l a n and execute within a shorter schedule. A f t e r h a v i n g succeeded i n convincing t h a t the optimal p l a n i s a l s o advantageous i n the e f f i c i e n t p h a s i n g o f t h e e x e c u t i o n , p i p e s have been o r d e r e d i n t h e f a c t o r y s h o r t l y after

Question 25
The p r o j e c t encourages the local solution o f environmental nuisances by t h e enlargement of a r e a s i r r i g a t e d b y sewage e f f l u e n t s . The extensive reuse of sewage effluents for irrigation in the Beersheva v a l l e y does n o t c r e a t e t i l l t h i s day any s e v e r e damages o r disturbances t o the public, and on the other hand adds t o t h e a r e a a l a r g e green o a s i s i n the desert. two n a t i o n a l The development o f industry centers i n the Eastern Negev e n a b l e s t h e t r a n s f e r o f a l l heavily polluting i n d u s t r i e s from

Question 28
The p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s have been c o o r d i n a t e d c o n t i n u o u s l y w i t h the national financial referee i n

t h e s t e e r i n g committee. National b u d g e t s h a v e been p r o m i s e d f o r the v a r i o u s s y s t e m development s t a g e s i n f u l l accordance w i t h the suggested plan.

6 . Planning Stage 5. Design Question 30

Project

Question 29
Post p l a n n i n g e v a l u a t i o n was concerned m a i n l y w i t h s e n s i t i v i t y analysis to unknown des i gn p a r a m e t e r s such a s : safe y i e l d o f t h e a q u i f e r ; c a p a c i t y o f w e l l s ; peak month demand; a v a i l a b i l i t y of the n a t i o n a l system; e t c .

The d e s i g n phase was c a r r i e d out separately by another e n g i n e e r i n g team. The detailed design of p i p e l i n e l a y o u t s and pumping stations followed the g e n e r a l p l a n r e s u l t i n g from t h e O . R . anal y s i s .

E A S I E H N NEGEV W A l E R - S U P P L Y

SY',II:M

I I F V t ~ II I P ' u t t I I

'51

Ill M . L

(fJllV.

I91IlJ)

5 .CL

-98-

-99-

LONG TERM INTEGRATED PLANNING OF THE DRINKING WATER SUPPLY IN THE PROVINCE OF SOUTH HOLLAND (THE NETHERLANDS): IODZH

BY
A.H.M. Bresser, National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Hygiene (RIVMI Project Leader of the Second Stage of the IODZH Study

1.

Introduction

i
I

Water s u p p l y i n t h e P r o v i n c e o f S o u t h H o l l a n d (The N e t h e r l a n d s ) is p r e s e n t l y d e a l t w i t h b y 30 w a t e r companies. The 1980 demand for p i p e d w a t e r amounts t o 250 x 10 m /a. F u t u r e demand (2010) w i l l be between 270 and 420 x 10 m /a w i t h a b e s t e s t i m a t e o f a b o u t 340 x 10 m /a. The p r e s e n t w a t e r s u p p l y s y s t e m consists o f 8 g r o u n d w a t e r pumping stations, 16 pumping s t a t i o n s o f water, 3 for bankf i 1 t r a t e d i n f i l t r a t e d s u r f a c e w a t e r by means o f ponds and 3 p u r i f i c a t i o n p l a n t s for reservoir water. I t w i l l be necessary t o e n l a r g e p a r t s o f the system. Water companies have made requests f o r licenses t o enlarge, e.g. the i n f i l t r a t i o n capacity in t h e dune a r e a a l o n g t h e c o a s t o f t h e N o r t h Sea. This area i s a nature r e s e r v e o f h i g h q u a l i t y and i s a l s o partly used for extensive recreation. Possible alternatives f o r t h e s u p p l y a r e t h e use o f e x c e s s capac i t y in reservoirs and purification plants, enlarging the use o f b a n k f i l t r a t e d w a t e r or a rather new technique for i n f i l t r a t i o n by means o f i n j e c t i o n . S i n c e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f n a t u r e and r e c r e a t i o n i n t e r e s t s b o t h demand a d e c r e a s e o f i n f i l t r a t i o n i n t h e dune area also, alternatives with a r e d u c e d i n f i l t r a t i o n c a p a c i t y have been s t u d i e d . The s t u d y has been c e n t e r e d a r o u n d and g u i d e d b y an e x t e n s i v e system s t u d y u s i n g b o t h s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n as t e c h n i q u e s (1). Supporting studies have been undertaken in the fields of

groundwater hydrology ( e s p e c i a l l y i n the dune area and for b a n k f i 1 t r a t i on) , dose effect r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n w a t e r s u p p l y and nature, between recreation and n a t u r e and b e t w e e n w a t e r s u p p l y a n d recreation, water qual i t y , r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e s u p p l y system and costs. S u r v e y s have been made o f t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n of nature, r e c r e a t i o n and w a t e r s u p p l y .
A t t h e f i n a l stage o f t h e study of the most of the results substudies have been incorporated w i t h i n t h e s i m u l a t i o n model.

I n t h e N e t h e r l a n d s p l a n n i n g of t h e water supply consists o f t h r e e (30 forms. The l o n g t e r m p l a n n i n g years period) f o r t h e c o u n t r y as a whole i s done at the central government. Medium t e r m p l a n n i n g (10 y e a r s p e r i o d ) i s a combined t a s k of r e g i o n a l government ( p r o v i n c e s ) and t h e w a t e r c o m p a n i e s . Short term planning i s done b y w a t e r c o m p a n i e s . The IOOZH-study i s a c o m b i n a t i o n o f l o n g t e r m and medium t e r m p l a n n i n g so b o t h t h e on a r e g i o n a l scale, central government and the p r o v i n c i a l government w e r e involved and t o o k part in the Steering Comm i t t e e . The s t u d y has been c a r r i e d o u t i n two s t a g e s . The f i r s t was ended 1981 w i t h a n Interim i n August (2). With t h i s r e p o r t the Report part s t u d y f o c u s s e d on t h e c e n t r a l o f t h e p r o b l e m , c u t back b o t h i n t h e r e g i o n u n d e r s t u d y and a l t e r n a t i v e s c o n s i d e r e d and w e n t i n t o m o r e d e t a i l of the for the remaining p a r t problem. The f i n a l s t a g e ended i n

-100-

A u g u s t 1983 w i t h the Final Report (3) p r e s e n t i n g an o v e r v i e w o f t h e s t u d y as a w h o l e , d e s c r i b i n g b r i e f l y t h e methods u s e d and f o c u s s i n g on conclusions regarding the possible s o l u t i o n s f o r t h e development o f t h e w a t e r s u p p l y , r e c r e a t i o n i n t h e dune area and nature preservation (regeneration included).

2. Planning Stage 1: Project initiation and Preliminary Planning

Question 1
The system i nvo 1v e d I S i n f 1 uenced by two planning procedures: o n w a t e r s u p p l y and on physical planning. The central government sets up a long term p l a n n i n g scheme ("Structuurschema") w h i c h i s w o r k e d o u t i n 10-year p l a n s f o r t h e w a t e r s u p p l y and i n s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t s such as pumping s t a t i o n s and p u r i f i c a t i o n p l a n t s . The long t e r m p l a n n i n g scheme i-s a l s o w o r k e d plans f o r regions out i n physical and d e s t i n a t i o n p l a n s f o r c e r t a i n areas. Along b o t h l i n e s p l a n n i n g i s a continuous process w i t h l i c e n s e s f o r actually bui l d i n g projects. L i c e n s e s have t o f i t i n the long t e r m schemes w h i c h m o s t l y p r o v i d e f o r boundary c o n d i t i o n s . Along b o t h l i n e s a number o f p l a n s and r e q u e s t s f o r l i c e n s e s came u p w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e same a r e a and s y s t e m . I n order to provide for an integrated s o l u t i o n o f t h e complicated problem for water supply, r e c r e a t i o n and n a t u r e , t h e s t u d y has been i n i t i a t e d by t h e former N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y and a p p o i n t e d y the Ministries involved and the Provincial Government of South Holland.

government. The t e c h n i c a l part of the planning (i.e. the study i t s e l f ) has been c a r r i e d o u t b y 7 research i n s t i t u t e s under superv i s i o n o f RID (now RIVM). The i n s t i t u t e s are: D e l f t H y d r a u l i c s Laboratory, National I n s t i t u t e for Water Supply,National I n s t i t u t e f o r Nature Studies, I n s t i t u t e for Environmental S t u d i e s and H e a l t h TNO, Research I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y KIWA, t h e P r ov i nc i a 1 Phys i c a 1 P I ann i ng Department and the Centre f o r of the Environment Stud i es University of Leiden. The p e o p l e c a r r y i n g o u t t h e study almost a l l had an academic degree. The disciplines varied from mathemat i c i a n s and eng i n e e r s to on biologists and experts r e c r e a t i ona 1 behaviour. The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e s t u d y have been formulated i n the f i r s t stage o f the s t u d y and w e r e t a k e n f r o m p u b l i c l y accepted p l a n n i n g procedures. The I n t e r i m Report which contains the o b j e c t i v e s and t h e f i r s t s c r e e n i n g o f a l t e r n a t i v e s appeared i n 1981 and in public, as was discussed t h e Final Report, issued i n Summer

1984.
Question 3
The m o s t important c r i t e r i o n f o r i n i t i a t i n g t h e s t u d y was t h a t u n t i l that time a l l attempts to r e a c h agreement o n t h e use o f t h e dune a r e a h a d f a l e d , w h i l e w i t h i n a l i m i t e d number o f years actual o b e t a k e n on t h i s decisions had subject

Question 4
C o n s t r a i n t s posed o n t h e s t u d y were: l i m i t e d t o the province of S o u t h H o l l a n d , no d i r e c t i n v o l v e m e n t of the interest groups (i.e. watercompanies, environmentalists a c t i o n groups), use o n l y e x i s t i n g data. These c o n s t r a i n t s were posed by t h e g o v e r n i n g bodies. The f i r s t constraint (areal) d i d n o t cause serious problems a l t h o u g h s l i g h t deviations f r o m i t w e r e made w h i c h were acceptable. The second constraint (no w a t e r c o m p a n i e s or

Question 2.
I n t h e s t u d y a d i v i s o n had been made between gove nmen t a 1 p l a n n i n g and t h e t e c h n i c a l p l a n n i n g procedures. The f i r s t has been d e a l t w i t h b y t h e S t e e r i n g Committee whose members a r e t o p - a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of central and provincial

-101-

interest groups i nvolved) caused many more problems. I t was discussed extensively and a compromi s e between the project d i r e c t o r s and t h e p r o j e c t team was techn ica 1 data and found : discussions on t e c h n i c a l matters with the interest parties were allowed, thus p r o v i d i n g a b e t t e r c o n n e c t i o n between t h e s t u d y and real ity. Still, even after f i n i s h i n g the study, t h i s c o n s t r a i n t poses serious problems because i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f proposed s o l u t i o n s needs coopor a t i on between a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and w a t e r companies. The t h i r d c o n s t r a i n t a l s o caused s e v e r e p r o b l e m s because d a t a on t h e p r e s e n t s t a t e o f n a t u r e i n t h e dune area was insufficient t o make p r e d i c t i o n s on p o s s i b l e e f f e c t s due to alterations i n the i n f i l t r a t i o n system. T h i s has b e e n s o l v e d a t t h e c o s t o f a b o u t a y e a r e x t r a t i m e and s e v e r a l man y e a r s e x t r a l a b o u r .

Question 5
I n t h e system a n a l y s i s p a r t o f t h e s t u d y a t f i r s t t h e r e was an e x t e n s i v e d i s c u s s i o n on t h e methods to be used: optimization or simulation. Both methods were adopted with emphasis on the simulation. This decision was r e a c h e d o n a t e c h n i c a l l e v e l and w a s a p p r o v e d b y t h e S t e e r i n g Committee a f t e r a b r i e f i n g by the study team. On methods t o be u s e d i n s u b s t u d i e s the study team d e c i d e d p r i m a r i l y , and made a p r o p o s i t i o n f o r the S t e e r i n g Committee f o r approval of financial a s p e c t s and manpower. On some occasions the Steering Commi t t e e changed proposals, in e x t e n t o r c o n t e n t , m o s t l y because o f f i n a n c i a l reasons.

3. Planning Stage Collection

Question 6

2:

Data

The s u b s t u d i e s made u s e of t h e i r own d a t a b a s e s and p r o v i d e d data f o r t h e s y s t e m s t u d y and f o r other substudies. The h y d r o l o g i c a l s t u d y used o b s e r v a t i o n s o f l e v e l s o f p h r e a t i c g r o u n d w a t e r and o f heads i n semi c o n f i n e d groundwater (annual

averages have been u s e d ) . The v a l i d a t i o n o f t h e m o d e l s was done with data of three years. Hydrogeological d a t a were d e r i v e d from pumping t e s t s and v a r i o u s o t h e r in hydrology, sources. Changes c a l c u l a t e d w i t h t h e m o d e l s as a n n u a l averages i n a steady s t a t e f o r a number o f s i t u a t i o n s , a r e i n p u t s f o r effect calculation. T r a v e l t i m e s of w a t e r t o d r a i n s and w e l l s w e r e a l s o calculated providing data for p r o t e c t i o n zones and f o r m i n g input for p h y s i c a l p l a n n i n g and f o r t h e r e c r e a t i o n study. Input data f o r the nature studies are surveys o f p l a n t s and v e g e t a t i o n over the p r o v i n c e as a w h o l e ( t h i s h a d been out ear 1 ie r by the c a r r i ed P 1 a n n i ng Provincial Phys i ca 1 D e p a r t m e n t e x c e p t f o r t h e dune a r e a : t h a t s u r v e y was p a r t o f t h e s t u d y ) . A l s o numbers o f b r e e d i n g p a i r s o f b i r d s , gathered continuously b y b i r d For w a t c h i n g groups, were used. recreation, i n p u t d a t a were c o u n t s of v i s i t o r s i n c e r t a i n areas a t several times, and interviews. Water quality of t h e sources of g r o u n d w a t e r was measured once i n t h e s t u d y as a check on available information (annua 1 sampl i ng) Water q u a l i t y o f r i v e r s i s measured continuously a t several points along t h e r i v e r s R h i n e and Meuse f o r a 1.ong p e r i o d . The d a t a o f t h e p e r i o d 1975-1980 ( i n c l .) have been u s e d . For r e l i a b i l i t y , d a t a on f a i l u r e s are scarce so m o s t l y e s t i m a t e s have been made. The p r e d i c t i o n on f u t u r e demands w e r e based upon demographical d a t a from t h e C e n t r a l Bureau o f the Census and the Provincial Phys i c a 1 P 1 a n n i ng Department. Data on i n d u s t r i a l d e v e l o p m e n t were o b t a i n e d from t h e N a t i ona 1 Phys i c a 1 Planning Department. Data o n s p e c i f i c w a t e r c o n s u m p t i o n were o b t a i n e d f r o m an earlier study of the National Water Supply. A l l I n s t i t u t e for water consumption d a t a a r e y e a r l y averages. Water c o n s u m p t i o n i n t h e W e s t l a n d h o r t i c u l t u r e a r e a has b e e n c a l c u l a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f d a t a from the h o r t i c u l t u r e research institute The s y s t e m and v a r y w i t h i n a y e a r . s t u d y uses f i g u r e s of the present s i t u a t i o n (lay-out, capacities, cost figures, e t c . ) o f t h e supply system as o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e w a t e r c o m p a n i e s .

-102-

Question 7
Not o n l y e x i s t i n g d a t a have been used. Surveys o f n a t u r e v a l u e h a v e been made ( c o u n t i n g p l a n t s and v e g e t a t i o n t y p e s o v e r 600 h e c t a r e s of dune a r e a ) . Recreation a c t i v i t y was c o u n t e d . Analyses of water samples from g r o u n d w a t e r pumping s t a t i o n s w e r e made. Dose-effect r e l a t i o n s have been e s t a b l i s h e d f r o m l i t e r a t u r e and f r o m o t h e r r e s e a r c h . I n other f i e l d s the inventory of already e x i s t i n g d a t a t o o k much effort. Forecasts for t h e demand and f o r w a t e r q u a l i t y i n g r o u n d w a t e r and r i v e r s w e r e i n p u t s i n t h e models and had t o b e g e n e r a t e d w i t h t h e a i d of h i s t o r i c a l data.

Question 10
A n a l y s i s o f h i s t o r i c a l d a t a on w a t e r q u a l i t y o f t h e r i v e r s has been done with multiple regression analysis f o r a l a r g e number of parameters us i ng a standard ( 4 ) . E x p e r t s ' v i e w s were programme used on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s as d a t a , sometimes as d o s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s , sometimes as w e i g h t i n g f a c t o r s in combining criteria. These v i e w s by interviews, were sol ic i t e d sometimes m a k i n g u s e o f t h e Saaty-De Graan method ( 5 ) .

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

4. I n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r case t h e s t u d y compared a l t e r n a t i v e s i n two stages: s c r e e n i n g based o n r o u g h leaving comparison of a l t e r n a t i v e s , out o b v i o u s bad ones, and t h e n further detailing of remaining a l t e r n a t i v e s and c a r e f u l comparison and judging of these against objectives. The q u e s t i o n s i n t h i s chapter w i l l b e answered f o r the first stage. The d e v e l o p m e n t o f methods t o b e used i n b o t h s t a g e s o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s was p a r t o f t h i s f i r s t stage o f t h e s t u d y and resources u s e d c a n n o t s i m p l y be d i v i d e d i n t o resources for the planning and f o r d e v e l o p m e n t o f methods. So t h e sum will be presented.

Question 8
Formal OR t e c h n i q u e s w e r e n o t used to d e t e r m i ne the data collection scheme. P r a c t ic a l this considerations dom i na t e d a s p e c t , a i d e d b y some a n a l y s i s . The water r e s o u r c e s management models used are deterministic. The a v a i l a b l e and o b t a i n a b l e d a t a d i d seldom a l l o w f o r a statistical approach. Data c o l l e c t i o n on t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n f o r n a t u r e posed a problem. S e v e r a l p o s s i b l e ways o f calculating effects of vegetation were available, all requiring d i f f e r e n t data sets. Since the survey o f t h e dune a r e a had t o be made i n an e a r l y s t a g e o f t h e s t u d y t h e method had t o be d e c i d e d upon. A smal 1 computer programme ( s i m u l a t i o n ) was u s e d t o compare t h e different methods and t o d e c i d e on t h e way i n w h i c h t h e s u r v e y had t o b e c a r r i e d out.

Question 1 1
I t t o o k a b o u t two y e a r s , 15 manyears and 1.5 m i l l i o n g u i l d e r s (about $600,000) t o complete t h e f i r s t stage o f t h e study. By t h a t t i m e much had a l r e a d y been p r e p a r e d for the final stage. Severa 1 computers had been used. The s i m u l a t i o n model v e r s i o n 1 was r u n a t , t h e computer o f D e l f t H y d r a u l i c The Laboratory ( i n Dynamo I I I ) . second v e r s i o n , a l s o i n Dynamo I l l , was on the computer of IBM Zoetermeer. The t h i r d v e r s i o n i n F o r t r a n was r u n on t h e computer o f ENR i n P e t t e n . B o t h DHL and RID had a d i r e c t l i n e t o t h i s machine.

Question 9
No s p e c i f i c programme has been s e t up t o assess t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f But t h e d a t a t h e d a t a b a s e s used. on t h e survey of t h e n a t u r e values i n t h e dunes had t o f i t i n a d a t a base o f n a t u r e values i n t h e r e s t o f t h e province which already existed. T h e programmes f o r p r o c e s s i n g t h e s e d a t a had t o b e a l t e r e d f o r this purpose.

-103-

The o p t i m i z a t i o n model a l s o r a n o n ENR computer with the the PDP-minicomputer o f RID as t e r m i n a l . The l a r g e h y d r o l o g i c a l models r a n i n Petten, w h i l e t h e s m a l l e r ones r a n on t h e PDP a t RID. The d a t a o n nature were processed on the computer o f t h e P r o v i n c i a l P l a n n i n g Department. The t o t a l e f f o r t had been s p r e a d o v e r w o r k i n g teams whose 1 eader s p a r t ic ipated in a c o o r d i n a t i o n team under t h e p r o j e c t 1 eader

d i scussed with the Steering Committee. The l n t e r i m r e p o r t g a v e a screening of the a l t e r n a t i v e s . The r e m a i n i n g ones were s t u d i e d i n much more d e t a i l i n t h e second s t a g e o f the study.

Question 75
D e c i s i o n makers i n t h i s case are the Provincial Government and t h e two M i n i s t r i e s of Physical Planning, H o u s i n g and E n v i r o n m e n t a l Management and o f A g r i c u l t u r e and Fishery (recreation and nature preservation i ncluded) Civi 1 servants of these bodies form the S t e e r i n g Committee. Proposals f o r S c r e e n i n g and a l t e r n a t i v e s were made b y t h e s t u d y team and d i s c u s s e d i n the Steering Committee. The suggestions for screening were supported by trade-offs between c r i t e r i a such as c o s t s , drinking w a t e r q u a l i t y and damage t o n a t u r e and b y a l t e r n a t i v e c o m b i n a t i o n s o f projects with the effects of all c r i t e r i a.

Question 12
In s t i t u t ional support was p r o v i d e d b y t h e S t e e r i n g Committee and t h e A d v i s o r y Committee and b y a on Legal and Task Force Instituti.onal Aspects. Representatives from t h e m i n i s t r i e s i n v o l v e d and f r o m t h e p r o v i n c e t o o k p a r t i n these committees. A l l along t h e s t u d y d e c i s i o n s had t o be made on aspects o f finances, screening, sometimes methods t o b e used, t i m e etc. Most d e c i s i o n s c o u l d b e t a k e n by the p r o j e c t leader (within the b u d g e t and t h e p r o j e c t programme). M a j o r d e c i s i o n s were t a k e n by t h e S t e e r i n g Committee w i t h t h e a d v i c e o f the project leader and the A d v i s o r y Committee. Some o f the intermediate results of the study f o u n d t h e i r way into provincial p o l i c i e s on w a t e r s u p p l y a f t e r t h e I n t e r i m R e p o r t had been p r e s e n t e d .

Question 76
The c o n s t r a d i s c u s s e d a t ques t h e y c o u l d be r e w i t h the Steering n t s were a l r e a d y ion 4 . Sometimes axed. i n d i s c u s s i o n Committee.

Question 77
The model f o r s i m u l a t i o n o f t h e development of the water supply s y s t e m (DRISIM) was d e v e l o p e d b y DHL and R I D . I t was f i r s t w r i t t e n i n DYNAMO, a t r y as made i n A C S L and i t was f i n a l l y r e w r i t t e n i n FORTRAN. The o p t i m i z a t i o n model was w r i t t e n a r o u n d t h e APEX s t a n d a r d LP- r o u t i n e i n Petter. The a v a i l a b l e a t ENR d e c i s i o n models o f S a a t y - d e Graan a t RID. had been d e v e l o p e d e a r l i e r The h y d r o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s made u s e o f s t a n d a r d m o d e l s a v a i l a b l e and m o s t l y developed b y R ID (TR I S E , MESH) P r o c e s s i n g o f n a t u r e v a l u e s has been done by t h e P r o v i n c i a l Planning wi th i t s own Department (PPD) existing programs. For the c a l c u l a t i o n o f e f f e c t s on v e g e t a t i o n and b i r d s t h e DHL t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e PPD and R I D d e v e l o p e d an a l g o r i t h m on the computer of PPD.

Question 73
T h e r e was no d i r e c t public involvement i n t h e study a f t e r t h e s t a r t and b e f o r e t h e Interimreport had been presented. The l n t e r i m r e p o r t was d i s t r i b u t e d w i d e l y and d i s c u s s e d i n a p u b l i c m e e t i n g .

Question 74
I n principle a l l projects for d r i n k i n g water s u p p l y which were technically feasible have been s t u d i e d t o some e x t e n t . Not a l l c o m b i n a t i o n s o f p r o j e c t s have b e e n studied. I n an e a r l y s t a g e o f t h e study a 1 i m i ted number of c o n n e c t i o n s between s u p p l y p o i n t s and demand nodes were p r o p o s e d and

-104-

The multiple correlation of w a t e r q u a l i t y was p e r f o r m e d w i t h t h e COMPANprogram, developed e a r l i e r at RID.

Question 18
The s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n model have been t e s t e d with the historical development o f t h e w a t e r supply system. Calculation of e f f e c t s c o u l d seldom be tested because all available d a t a on effects of historical developments o f t h e system were used t o d e t e r m i n e dose-effect relations. The e f f e c t c a l c u l a t i o n s t h e r e f o r e d i d n o t have an a b s o l u t e meaning b u t have o n l y been u s e d i n a c o m p a r a t i v e way in t h e f i r s t phase o f t h e s t u d y . The h y d r o l o g i c a l models had been t e s t e d already (standard programs). The models w e r e c a l i b r a t e d w i t h d a t a o n heads and g r o u n d w a t e r t a b l e s and with historical situations.

The c o m b i n a t i o n o f b i o l o g i s t s and t e c h n i c i a n s p r o v e d t o be v e r y worthwhile f o r both. Understanding of each o t h e r grew w i t h t h e s t u d y by the intensive espec i a 1 1 y d i s c u s s i o n s i n t h e s t u d y team. This resulted i n solutions for the development of the water supply system, recreation and nature preservation that c a n be named harmonious, d e s p i t e g r e a t c o n f l i c t s a b o u t t h e same m a t t e r i n t h e p a s t . So a j o i n t p l a n n i n g p r o c e d u r e seems to be much better than o n l y calculating effects of plans a f t e r t h e d e s i g n o f a l i m i t e d number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s (which i s t h e case in e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact assessment)

5. Planning Stage Development of Final Project Specifications

4:

Question 19
I n t h i s stage o f the study the "technical" experts (= s t u d y team) made v e r y s p e c i f i c p r o p o s a l s for alternatives. The s c r e e n i n g of Steering Committee d i s c u s s e d t h e proposals, adjusted them when necessary ( s l i g h t 1 y) and p r e s e n t e d the lnterimreport t o the m i n i s t e r s i nvo 1ved and the P r o v i nc i a 1 Government. Sever a 1 different advisory committees on p h y s i c a l p l a n n i n g and e n v i r o n m e n t , t h e w a t e r companies, a c t i o n g r o u p s and o t h e r i n t e r e s t e d p e o p l e were a s k e d to comment o n t h e r e p o r t . A public presentation has been held. Governmental d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s a d o p t e d t h i s i n t e r m e d i a t e r e s u l t and a g r e e d o n t h e second s t a g e o f t h e s t u d y .

I n t h i s chapter o n l y the f i n a l will be stage of the study discussed, i.e. further detailing the remaining a1 t e r n a t i v e s and c o m p a r i n g them i n t e r m s o f the objectives, analysis o f the f i e l d o f possible solutions and drawing conclusions from t h e a n a l y s i s .

Question 27
OR methods have been used as i n (see c h a p t e r 4, planning stage 3 q u e s t i ons 11 and 17). The o p t i m i z a t i o n model was n o t u s e d t o d e f i n e an o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n b u t as a screening procedure to define obvious inferior solutions. The s i m u l a t i o n model was u s e d t o f i n d harmonious s o l u t i o n s . Most o f t h e m o d e l l i n g h a s been done b y DHL and RID. O f c o u r s e p a r t s o f t h e model were d e r i v e d from l i t e r a t u r e , but the literature i t s e l f was n o t v e r y u s e f u l . The system s t u d y team had advisors a t i t s disposal (Prof. U. Shamir and D r . W. Wils), In d i s c u s s i o n s and e x c e r c i s e s d i f f e r e n t methods h a v e been e x p l o r e d . The main p a r t o f t h e s y s t e m s t u d y was t h e s i m u l a t i o n model. T h i s has been r e w r i t t e n t h r e e times i n different computer languages. Dynamo I l l was the first one, but the implementation of Fortran s u b r o u t i n e s i n Dynamo was, a t that moment and o n t h e computer t h a t was

Question 20
Yes, i t c e r t a i n l y has b e e n an interdisciplinary planning e f f o r t , and t h e m i x was r a t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e . The study team suggested the an i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n c o r p o r a t i o n of s u b s t u d y , b u t t h e S t e e r i n g Committee this. The m o s t d i d n o t a l l o w for d i s a p p o i n t i n g t h i n g has been t h a t no watercompanies were a l l o w e d t o t a k e actual p a r t i n the planning process.

-105-

was used, n o t p o s s i b l e . ACSL was t h e second one, b u t t h e t r a i n i n g o f t h e p e o p l e w i t h t h i s l a n g u a g e was so f i n a l l y t h e model insufficient, was w r i t t e n c o m p l e t e l y i n Fortan. This model was more or less a optimized, reducing the c o s t s for The r u n by a f a c t o r o f a b o u t 20. f i n a l version o f D R l S l M i s a very I t has u s e f u l one and e a s y t o r u n . been used, with alterations for s p e c i f i c uses, s i n c e then i n s e v e r a l So t h e model other s t u d i e s a t DHL. the c a n e a s i l y b e made t o f i t problem, and except from the necessary schemat i z a t i o n of the s u p p l y system t h e p r o b l e m does n o t have t o b e a d j u s t e d t o f i t t h e model. The s i m u l a t i o n model grew w i t h t h e study. I t i s not possible t o a s s e s s t h e t i m e used t o c o n s t r u c t the model. Constructing, r e c o n s t r u c t i n g and r u n n i n g t h e model were p a r t o f t h e c e n t r a l r o l e o f t h e system s t u d y i n t h e p r o j e c t as a whole, guiding substudies and gradually reaching conclusions.

simulation model. -Re1 i a b i 1 i t y of t h e supp y s y s t e m w a s o n e o f t h e c r i t e r i a t h e decision-makers decided to obta in upon, and sought information bout. Although d a t a on failures in supply systems a r e s c a r c e and a s t a t i s t i c a l approach shows great uncertainties, the analysis of this i t e m was r a t h e r successful. Weak spots in the system could be identified. A Trade-off between costs and r e l i a b i l i t y i s possible t o a certain extent. Discussions on t h i s item are continuing.

Questions 24/25

Question 22
No specific cost benef i t a n a l y s i s has been made. Costs were, together w i t h a number o f other criteria, an objective to be minimized i n b o t h t h e models and i n t h e s t u d y as a w h o l e . The c o s t s o f t h e s t u d y itself rather high. But a t t h e s t a r t o f t h e s t u d y a p o l i t i c a l impasse had been r e a c h e d w h i c h had t o be b r o k e n . I t i s n o t b e be e x p e c t e d t h a t a t h i s magnitude w i l l be study of c a r r i e d out again. Parts o f the s t u d y m i g h t have b e e n done a t less costs, w i t h t h e same i m p a c t o n t h e conclusions. are

Question 23
R i s k a n a l y s i s o f t h e system s t u d y formed p a r t o f the

The s i m u l a t i o n model generates a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r t h e development o f the water supply system and calculates t h e e f f e c t s on a number o f objectives (nature included). An alternative originates from a strategy, a s c e n a r i o and a s e t o f t e c h n i c a l assumptions. A strategy i n t h i s case i s a s e t o f maximum capacities for a l l projects and pipe1 ines in t h e s y s t e m and a prescript of the order i n which p r o j e c t s s u p p l y w a t e r t o each o f t h e demand n o d e s . A scenario i s a set o f assumptions on developments w h i c h a r e o u t s i d e t h e system. ( s u c h as t h e economic d e v e l o p m e n t or the A l a r g e number o f energy p r i c e ) . a l t e r n a t i v e s has been generated, each w i t h a l l t h e e f f e c t s c a l c u l a t e d too. The a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e p o i n t s i n a continuum. The m a i n v a r i a b l e s i n t h e s t r a t e g i e s w e r e t h e amount o f surface i n f i l t r a t i o n i n t h e dunes and t h e amount o f deep i n f i l t r a t i o n . When u s i n g t h e s e t w o v a r i a b l e s as axes t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s can b e p u t i n a f i g u r e where lines of equal e f f e c t s c a n be d r a w n f o r each o f t h e criteria (see Annex I). Eleven o b j e c t i v e s i n a l l were c o n s i d e r e d :

under

-106-

(1) V e g e t a t i o n

: changes i n a r e a c o v e r e d by v e g e t a t i o n types: weighted

: changes

(2) Landscape

i n the value (area times weight)

of

landscape

(3) B i r d s
(4) Ecosystem

: changes

i n numbers o f b r e e d i n g p a i r s times t h e v a l u e o f types of b i r d s

: disturbances a t various levels w i t h i n ecosystems ( a r e a times t h e i n t e n s i t y ) times t h e importance of a l e v e l w i t h i n t h e system t i m e s t h e v a l u e o f t h e e c o s y s t em : t h e w e i g h t e d a v e r a g e o f 12 p a r a m e t e r s ( w i t h standard considered) : t h e judgement of source-purification

(5)

Water

qual i t y

(6) Pub1 i c

health

experts systems

of

(7)

Security

of

p r o d u c t i o n : t h e judgement o f experts s o u r c e - p u r i f i c a t i o n systems

of

(8) R e l i a b i l i t y o f s u p p l y

: the c a l c u l a t e d non-deliverance p r o m i l l a g e of t h e supply

: i n cents per m3 d e l i v e r e d p l a n n i n g h o r i z o n (2010)

as

(9) P r o d u c t i o n c o s t s

at

the

(10) P r e s e n t v a l u e o f t o t a l costs

: total p 1 ann
: .total plann

the od the od

system

in

the

(11) P r e s e n t v a l u e o f i nvestments

system

in

the

Vegetation, c o s t s and water were considered the qual i t y "leading" objectives. T h i s does n o t mean t h a t the other objectives are unimportant, b u t rather that these three are, under the present circumstances, t h e ones w h i c h m o s t determine the best compromise s o l u t ion. For each o f t h e c r i t e r i a f i v e c l a s s e s have b e e n i d e n t i f i e d v a r y i n g from A (= i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n w i t h t h e (= goals f o r the objective) to E completely i n l i n e w i t h the goals).

The c l a s s e s h a v e been d e r i v e d f r o m p o l i c y documents and i n d i s c u s s i o n with the Steering Commi t t e e . C o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e f i g u r e s f o r each c r i t e r i o n showed an area with a l t e r n a t i v e s where no o b j e c t i v e was contradicted (except landscape) These s o l u t i ons were called r e a s o n a b l y good s o l u t i o n s . Within t h i s a r e a a more l i m i t e d number o f so c a l l e d harmoneous s o l u t i o n s c o u l d b e i d e n t i f i e d where t h e s c o r e s on t h e major o b j e c t i v e s (vegetation, c o s t s , w a t e r q u a l i t y ) were p o s i t i v e II). Except from (annex

-107-

i n f i l t r a t i o n , w a t e r can be s u p p l i e d or from from bank filtration reservoirs. In the alternatives of i n which annex I and I I t h e o r d e r these projects are used was standard. D i f f e r e n t s t r a t e g i e s have been investigated. Annex I l l shows some results i n o b j e c t i v e space, the d e c i d i n g o b j e c t i v e s b e i n g c o s t s and v e g e t a t i o n a s can b e d e r i v e d f r o m t h e annexes I and ( I . F o r m u l a t i o n o f conclusions from t h i s analysis was done i n discussion with the S t e e r i n g Committee. The g r a p h i c a l presentation (together w i t h tables) i n the p r o v e d t o be v e r y u s e f u l discussions. The o p t i m i z a t i o n model was n o t u s e d i n t h i s phase d e s p i t e of the bui I t - i n possibi 1 i t y mu1 t i - o b j e c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i o n b e c a u s e the d e c i s i o n process i t s e l f was i m p o r t a n t and no w e i g h t s c o u l d b e e s t a b l i s h e d beforehand. Besides t h e results of t h i s model w e r e too aggregate. The d i r e c t d i s c u s s i o n s between analysts and Steering Committee proved to be very successful. Graphics are very useful i n t h i s discussion. The a n a l y s i s has been s u p p o r t e d b y an e x t e n s i v e s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s on variables i n strategies, scenarios and t e c h n i c a l d a t a s e t . One o f the methods u s e d i n t h i s i s w i t h META mode 1 s (6) . This p r o v i ded i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e n e c e s s a r y w i d t h of the classes used and the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between a l t e r n a t i v e s . I t a l s o p r o v i d e d a sound b a s i s f o r discussions with the Steering Committee.

and l e g a l " i n f o r m a t i o n " t o i t . The c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e s t u d y a r e - among suggestions for the others capacities of p r o j e c t s t h a t should b e l i c e n s e d a t a maximum. Decisions on t h e l i c e n s e s have n o t been t a k e n y e t . (January 1984). The s t u d y d i d n o t end up w i t h an " o p t i m a l " soluti o n . T h e r e i s no such t h i n g as " t h e " o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n i n t h i s case.

Questions 27/28
The d e s i g n o f a f i n a l p l a n not p a r t o f t h i s study. was

Question 29
Not y e t ( J a n u a r y 1984)

6 . Planning Stage 5: Design

Project

The d e s i g n o f s u p p l y p i p e s and p r o j e c t s was n o t p a r t o f t h e j o b . Watercompanies themelves design parts of t h e s u p p l y system w i t h i n the constraints of licenses and funds. The s i m u l a t i o n model D R l S l M i s used p r e s e n t l y t o the further d e s i g n o f p a r t s o f t h i s system.

Acknowledgement
The s t a r t o f t h e p r o j e c t and the f i r s t s t a g e o f t h e s t u d y have been g u i d e d b y t h e f i r s t p r o j e c t leader Mr. F. Langeweg o f R I D . W i t h o u t h i s d r i v i n g power t h e s t u d y w o u l d p r o b a b l y h a v e ended a t i t s beginning w i t h a l o t o f confusion between d i s c i p l i n e s . The s t u d y has been s u p p o r t e d by the S t e e r i ng P. Committee w i t h chairman M r . V e r k e r k and s e c r e t a r y Dr. H. de Boois. The p o s i t i v e a p p r o a c h o f t h i s committee t o t h e problems b o t h i n management and in contents l a r g e l y c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e success.

Question 26
The d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s accepted t h e r e p o r t as a base f o r f u t u r e p o l i c i e s . They added institutional

-108-

Literature
1) Bresser, A.H.M., and W.K. Pluij m , July 1981 Multi o b j e c t i v e p l a n n i n g o f t h e water supply f o r the Province of South-Holland (The N e t h e r l a n d s ) Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I F O R S ' 8 1 C o n f e r e n c e i n Hamburg, 1981. Anonymous, 1981 lnterimreport (in Dutch) Report by the Steering Comm i t t e e I ODZH National I n s t i t u t e f o r Water Supply ( R I D ) Anonymous, 1983 F i n a l r e p o r t ( i n Dutch) R e p o r t by t h e S t e e r i n g Comm i t t e e I ODZH N a t i ona 1 I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y (RID)

4)

Graan, J.G. de, R.J.A. D u j a r d i n and J . Koster, 1980 of COMPAN; a User manual computer p r og r amme for multi-linear regression analysis based on e i g e n v e c t o r s . National I n s t i t u t e f o r Water Sup,ply (RID) Graan, J.G. de, 1978 Some e x t e n s i o n s t o t h e d e c i s i o n model o f Saaty N a t i o n a l l n s i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y ( R I D ) Kleijnen J.P.C., 1981 Statistical aspects of simulation: an u p d a t e d s u r v e y T i lburg University

2)

5)

6)
3)

-109-

ANNEX 1A

Lines of equal effects on objectives for entire alternatives

(for legends see Annex 1B )

10
effects o n vegetation

capacity of deep infiltration

1 0 120 130 140 150 I60 170 180 190 1100 1110 1120 113( 1

effects on landscape

lo l 0
effects on birds

130

capacity of deep infiltration

loo im Iso

Lo ln0 lg0 l o0 l l0 1120113

effects on w a t e r q u a l i t y

effects on e n t i r e ecosystems

effects on p u b l i c health

-110-

ANNEX 1 B

Lines of e q u a l e f f e c t s on objectives for entire alternatives

security o f production

production costs

reliability o f the supply

Legends A = in conflict with the objective B = some conflicting points C = neutral or indifferent D = some positive points E = in full accordance with the objective capacities in millions of rn3/a

present value o f investments

- 1 1 1

ANNEX 2

Selection of harmonious alternatives

capacity of deep infiltration (in millions of m3/a) Legends

l i Harmonious solutions m

m u

Reasonably good solutions

-112-

ANNEX 3

Comparison of alternative strategies on costs and vegetation effects

25 -

20 -

Alternative 7 Capacity surface infiltration = 50 million m3/a Capacity deep infiltration = 40 million m3/a

----I
---.-

Additional strategies no deep infiltration; standard strategy standard strategy + deep infiltration use of reservoirs + existing plants use of bankfiltration new purification plant

present value of total costs (million guilders)

-113-

POST EVALUATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN LEVEL-B STUDY

BY
Yacov Y. HAIMES Professor and Principal Investigator of the Case Western Reserve University's portion of the study. Ph.D. student at the Systems Engineering Department, Case Western Reserve University,Cleveland, Ohio. Executive and Planning Director, Great Lakes Basin Commission. Ann Arbor, Michigan; also the supervisor of the Study Manager. Senior Planner and Assistant to the Study Manager, Great Lakes Basin Commission, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

KAI SUNG

Leonard T. CROOK

David GREGORKA

1.

Introduction
A hierarchical-multiobjective m o d e l i n g and o p t i m i z a t i o n e f f o r t has been a p p l i e d t o L e v e l - B p l a n n i n g in the Maumee River Basin. The p r i n c p a l e s . and s t a n d a r d s f o r w a t e r and r e l a t e d l a n d r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g prepared b y t h e Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l and a d o p t e d b y Congress o n 10 September 1973 i d e n t i f y two m a j o r o b j e c t i v e s i n such p l a n n i n g :

r e f l e c t i n g s o c i e t y ' s preferences for attaining the objectives defined above. The t h r e e l e v e l s o f study, known as L e v e l s A , B, and C , a r e aimed a t i d e n t i f y i n g w a t e r and land problems, d e v e l o p i n g p l a n s w h i c h a r e responsive t o t h e above o b j e c t i v e s , and f i n a l l y , implementing these plans. The L e v e l - B s t u d y i n t h e Maumee River Basin was structured to i d e n t i f y and e v a l u a t e a l l o f t h e major w a t e r - r e l a t e d land resources p r o b 1 ems. I t cons i d e r e d and e v a l u a t e d a l l o f t h e measures t h a t may resolve t h e s e p r o b l e m s and o f f e r e d b o t h an i m m e d i a t e a c t i o n and for long-range action plan implementation by v a r i o u s l e v e l s o f government. Programs were recommended to fill data and r e s e a r c h gaps. In addition, a coordinated approach to needed d e t a i l e d s t u d i e s o f management and s t r u c t u r a l programs was identified for implementation a t a l l l e v e l s of government. The Maumee s t u d y a r e a c o n s i s t e d o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5,700,000 acres o f l a n d and 40,000 a c r e s o f

1. To enhance national economic d e v e l o p m e n t by i n c r e a s i n g the value o f the Nation's output o f goods and s e r v i c e s , and i m p r o v i n g n a t i o n a l economic e f f i c i e n c y .
2 . To enhance t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t b y t h e management, conservation, preservation, c r e a t i on, restoration, or improvement of the qual i t y o f certain natural and cultural r e s o u r c e s and e c o l o g i c a l systems.
The o v e r a l l purpose o f water is to and l a n d r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g promote t h e q u a l i t y o f life by

-114-

-115-

w a t e r s u r f a c e (see Map). More t h a n h a l f o f the l a t t e r i s the surface o f Maumee Bay. Much o f the land, is n e a r l y l e v e l or g e n t l y s l o p i n g , in agricultural use. Because t h e s o i l has a s l o w p e r m e a b i l i t y rate, natural drainage problems e x i s t throughout the basin.

is Much o f the b a s i n ' s area prime a g r i c u l t u r a l land developed through drainage of the Great Black Swamp. However, there are also substantial urban concentrations centered about t h e c i t i e s o f Toledo, Lima, and F o r t Wayne. Already t h i s r e p r e s e n t s an e m e r g i n g c o n f l i c t o v e r optimal a l l o c a t i o n of land use: or whether urban expans i o n a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d have i n the f u t u r e . The most priority serious issue a t present i s t h a t o f water qual i t y . Point sources, mun i c i pa 1 and industrial, and nonpoint sources, urban and a g r i c u l t u r a l r u n o f f , both c o n t r i b u t e heavi 1 y to waste 1 oads S e d i m e n t a t i o n due t o e r o s i o n i s a problem throughout t h e basin, which i s a m p l i f i e d through deposits a t t h e Maumee Bay. Shoreline flooding remains a troublesome problem, and navigational issues are quite i m p o r t a n t t o t h e economy o f the region. Finally, quality of life c o n s i d e r a t i o n s come i n t o p l a y i n t h e f i s h and areas of recreation, w i Id1 i f e preservation, and environmental conservation.
R e l a t e d problems f o r purposes of the Maumee s t u d y h a v e been i s o l a t e d and a r e r e f e r r e d t o u n d e r the categories o f land resource management, eros ion and sedimentation, water qual i t y , f i s h e r y resources, wildlife and hunting, outdoor recreation, f l o o d i n g , and w a t e r s u p p l y .

political institutions. To m i n i m i z e complexities associated with crossing p o l i t i c a l boundaries, the Maumee s t u d y a r e a was d i v i d e d into five subareas, each bounded b y c o u n t y l i n e s and each l y i n g w i t h i n a A sixth planning singl'e state. subarea, Maumee Bay, was u n i q u e i n it i s composed e n t i r e l y of that water. Level-B planning studies attempt t o c o o r d i n a t e and i n v o l v e a l l l e v e l s and u n i t s o f government r e s p o n s i b l e for water resources i n t h e area s t u d i e d . Accordingly, the Maumee L e v e l - B S t u d y i v o l v e d s t a t e , regional, 1 oca 1 and federal agenc i es

The u l t i m a t e o b j e c t i v e was to f o r m u l a t e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e management plan which w o u l d a1 l e v i a t e t h e serious problem of the basin. The purpose of this s t u d y was to i n v e s t i g a t e some o f these c r i t i c a l a r e a s w h i c h must b e f a c e d i n t h e development of such a p l a n . In p a r t i c u l a r a r e two b r o a d a r e a s o f consideration: (1) t e c h n i ca 1 p r o b 1 ems, i nc 1 u d i ng the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f g o a l s and d e c i s i o n variables, and t h e measurement o f p a r a m e t e r s and performance; (2) institutional problems, including of i n f 1 uence and area r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , and a v a i l a b i l i t y o f resources.

2.

P l a n n i n g State 1: Project I n i t i a t i o n a n d P r e l i m i n a r y Planning

Question I
Yes. The Maumee R i v e r B a s i n Level-B Study i n i t i a t e d by t h e Great Lakes B a s i n Commission was an e f f o r t t o s e t up a comprehensive 15-year (1976-1990) p r o g r a m ( p l a n ) t o deal with t h e major problems i n the b a s i n , s u c h as w a t e r q u a l i t y and land use (including s o i l erosion, recreational facilities, preservation of w i l d l i f e habitat, flood control, etc.). The g o a l of this r e s e a r c h was t o develop a management framework f o r t h e Maumee River Basin's water and land resources problems within the guidelines of t h e Water Resources C o u n c i l ' s P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s .

P l a n n i n g f o r t h e area involved both pol it i c a l and hydrologic boundaries. The e n t i r e t h r e e - s t a t e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n , including the e n t i r e d r a i n a g e a r e a o f Maumee Bay, was c o n s i d e r e d , as were t h e s t a t e and c o u n t y b o u n d a r i e s encompassing t h e drainage area. River basins c r o s s s t a t e and c o u n t r y l i n e s .and a r e g o v e r n e d by a b r o a d a r r a y o f

-116-

A t t h e t i m e t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y was s t a r t e d , a l e v e l - A l o n g - t e r m p l a n n i n g programme was underway and n e a r i n g c o m p l e t i o n . The L e v e l - A S t u d y c o v e r e d t h e e n t i r e G r e a t Lakes r e g i o n and encompassed of eight Great Lakes portions water area states, a l l of the U.S. Lawrence of t h e l a k e s , and t h e S t . R i v e r as f a r as the international boundary. I t was c o n t e m p l a t e d t h a t t h e more i n v o l v e d , c o m p l i c a t e d , and immediate p r o b l e m areas w i t h i n t h e e n t i r e G r e a t L a k e s b a s i n w o u l d be treated with individual level-B studies of t h e Maumee t y p e . The most u r g e n t problems i n t h e Great Lakes B a s i n w e r e c o n s i d e r e d b y t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission t o b e t h e Maumee River basin, which provided the subject of the f i r s t level-B study initiated after the t h e G r e a t Lakes Level-A Study o f B a s i n as a w h o l e .

C o m m i s s i o n ' s p l a n n i n g , and f o r m e d a r e s e a r c h team t a s k w i t h t h e t i t l e : A Multiobjective Analysis i n the Maumee R i v e r B a s i n - A Case S t u d y on Level-B Planning. T h i s team was composed o f , i n a d d i t i o n t o Dr. Ha i mes as the p r i nc i pa 1 invest igator, three full-time research assistants and one technical secretary. Also involved in t h i s research p r o j e c t , on a part-time basis, were one post-doctoral f e l l o w and f o u r o t h e r research assistants. The p u b l i c was i n v o l v e d i n t h e formulation of project objectives. I n fact, the Citizens' Advisory Committee was e s t a b l i s h e d i n o r d e r to represent the public and interested citizens' organizations i n I n d i a n a , M i c h i g a n , and O h i o . In response t o t h e major p r o b l e m s and concerns w i t h i n t h e basin, t h e CAC i d e n t i f i e d e i g h t major goals f o r the Level-B p l a n .

Question 2
The great Lakes Bas i n Commission f o r m e d a P l a n n i n g Board, w i t h members f r o m t h e following state and federal government agencies: t h e I n d i a n a Department o f N a t u r a l Resources, the Michigan Department o f N a t u r a l Resources, t h e Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, t h e U.S. Department of A g r i c u l t u r e , t h e U.S. Army Corps o f Environmental Engineers, t h e U.S. Protection Agency, the U.S. Department o f the Interior, the G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission, and the Maumee Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC)

Question 3
From t h e b e g i n n i n g i t was c l e a r t h a t l i m i t s would be s e t on t h i s project in terms o f t h e funds m i l l i o n dollars) and g r a n t e d (1.5 Other t h e t i m e a v a i l a b l e (3 y e a r s ) . factors that influenced the nature o f t h e s t u d y were t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e agencies conducting t h e study, the neutrality of t h e commission s t a f f , and t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and interest of the several s t a t e s i n t h e study. The n a t i o n w i d e c r i t e r i a for level-B studies required a review of s e v e r e p r o b l e m s and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of a series of a 1 t e r na t i ve solutions. The a1 t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s supported t h r e e d i f f e r e n t econom i c goals: n a t iona 1 development, e n v i r o n m e n t a l quality, and a m i x e d a p p r o a c h . The national criteria for level-B studies also required that these studies do not normally develop specific projects for construction but should instead p r e s e n t a program for t h e . b a s i n w i d e of p r o b 1 ems. r e s o 1 u t i on Consequently, specific project

I n addition t o the r e l a t i v e l y highly s k i l l e d personnel i n the s t a t e and f e d e r a l agencies, the Great Lakes Basin Commission's p l a n n i ng staff foresaw the possibility of testing innovative planning processes in the of t h e Maumee R i v e r development Basin plan. One o f t h e s e p r o c e s s e s was the surrogate worth trade-off method o f h i e r a r c i c a l p l a n n i n g t h a t was b e i n g d e v e l o p e d a t t h a t t i m e by Dr. Yacov Haimes o f Case W e s t e r n Warren R e s e r v e U n i v e r s i t y and D r . Or. Haimes was a g r e e a b l e t o Hall. the idea o f cooperating w i t h the

-117-

d e s i g n was n o t undertaken i n the Maumee R i v e r B a s i n L e v e l - B S t u d y . The normal decision c r i t e r i a for p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t (such as t h a t i t presents a favorable benefit/cost ratio, that there is no less e x p e n s i v e way t o a c h i e v e t h e same benefit, t h a t each p a r t o f the project i s incrementally j u s t i f i e d , benefit and t h a t t h e p r o j e c t w i l l t h e p u b l i c as a w h o l e r a t h e r t h a n small segment of the just a were not r ig id 1y popu 1 a t i on) emp 1 oyed .

Question 4
Because t h e Maumee R i v e r Basin Level-B S t u d y was c o n s t r a i n e d b y t i m e and f u n d i n g a s w e l l as b y t h e u s e o f e x i s t i n g d a t a and c o n c l u s i o n s o f p a s t and o n g o i n g s t u d i e s , n o t a l l of the Goals and Objectives C i t i zens I establ ished by the A d v i s o r y Committee c o u l d be m e t b y t h i s study. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e l i m i t i n g u s e o f e x i s t i n g d a t a was imposed by t h e Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l i n t h e i r "New Approaches t o Level-B Planning." This, together w i t h a f u n d i n g c u t ( t o 1.5 m i l l i o n dollars) and t i m e c u t (3 y e a r s ) presented problems throughout the e n t i r e study period. Moreover, the N a t i o n a l Water Resources C o u n c i l ' s P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s f o r Water and R e l a t e d Land Resources P l a n n i n g caused more c o n f u s i o n r a t h e r than guidance. Each agency i n v o l v e d i n the study had v a r i ous i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and e x p l a n a t i o n s o f the Principles and Standards. Because these interpretations expanded the range of suggested a c t i on, add i t i o n a l constraints seemed t o e x i s t i n t h a t t h e members of t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission objected t o consideration o f the extreme a l t e r n a t i v e s which would p r o d u c e e i t h e r a t o t a l l y economic a development-or i e n t e d plan or t o t a l l y environmental preservation and improvement p l a n , since these extremes would be u n a c c e p t a b l e t o c e r t a i n segments o f t h e p u b l i c and might be politically damaging. Consequently, t h e s t a f f and t h e P l a n n i n g Board w e r e d i r e c t e d to e l i m i n a t e t h e more d r a s t i c e x t r e m e s f i r s t d e s i g n e d and c o n s i d e r those

closer t o a midpoint. The n a t i o n a l laws i n e f f e c t a t t h i s time placed primary water q u a l i t y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n t h e hands o f t h e s t a t e , w i t h t h e f e d e r a l government h a v i n g r e g u l a t o r y responsibility. The s t u d y needed a systems a p p r o a c h t o w a t e r q u a l i t y and a w a t e r quality plan for the e n t i r e basin. The s t a t e s w e r e n o t equipped t o p r e p a r e such a p l a n . The f e d e r a l government refused t o considered undertake i t since they t h i s t o be a s t a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and i n t e r p r e t e d f e d e r a l regulations t o a l l o w o n l y one a p p r o a c h t o w a t e r q u a l i t y improvement. Consequently, t h e P l a n n i n g Board c o u l d n o t use a d e s i r a b l e systems a p p r o a c h on a q u a n t i t a t i v e b a s i s t h a t m i g h t have l e d t o an optimum s o l u t i o n t o t h e water q u a l i t y problems i n t h e b a s i n , and they i n s t e a d s e l e c t e d as a in surrogate the arbitary reduction silt as an indicator of environmental quality within the r i v e r . This i s a r e l a t i v e l y correct but limited representation. I t obviously i s not a f u l l treatment of the environmental q u a l i t y problem. Consequently, the study was inadequate i n t h i s r e s p e c t .

Question 5
No. I n addition t o discussion concerning enviromental q u a l i t y , the efficacy of the surrogate worth t r a d e - o f f (SWT) method was i n i t i a l l y q u e s t i o n e d because o f i t s newness and un t e s t ed cond i t i on. The consultants from Case Western Reserve U n i v e r s i t y p r e s e n t e d t h e i r method t o t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d . The P l a n n i n g B o a r d was e n c o u r a g e d to support the development of the i n f o r m a t i o n needed by the SWT practioners. Agreement o v e r methods to be u s e d o r d i s p u t e s a r i s i n g w i t h i n t h e P l a n n i n g Board, between t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d and t h e t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t s and c o n s u l t a n t s , o r b e t w e e n t h e C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y Committee and t h e s t u d y c o m m i t t e e were r e s o l v e d b y a Steering Commi t t e e wh i c h of the represented supervisors P l a n n i n g B o a r d members. The B a s i n Commissions had the final responsibility for the specific recommendations e m a n a t i n g from t h e study

-118-

3. Planning Stage 2 Data Collection and Processing

Question 6
Level-B s t u d i e s a r e p r e c l u d e d f r o m c o l l e c t i n g d a t a as a s p e c i f i c activity. I n most cases where critical d a t a a r e a b s e n t , a minimum data collection effort, within f u n d i n g and t i m e limitations, is permitted; however, most p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s had s p e n t more t i m e and money o n d a t a c o l l e c t i o n t h a n on p r o b l e m r e s o l u t i o n , and t h e L e v e l - B S t u d y was d e s i g n e d t o c o u n t e r a c t this situation.

SOC

supp 1 i ed pol i t i c a basin.

a1 and economic d a t a were b y t h e s t a t e and o t h e r subdivisions w i t h i n the

Quest on 7
I n g e n e r a l , on,ly e x i s t i n g d a t a were used. However, new a n a l y s e s and d i s p l a y s o f e x i s t i n g d a t a were developed. A r t i f i c i a l generation o f h y d r o l o g i c d a t a had been d e v e l o p e d b y t h e Corps o f E n g i n e e r s and t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n was a v a i l a b l e t o the Some measurements were study . continued d u r i n g the planning stage, such as w a t e r q u a l i t y measurements, b u t t h e s e had relatively minor e f f e c t s on p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g .

OBERS The s t u d y used the Series-E projections of national d e m o g r a p h i c and economic growth. OBERS i s an acronym d e r i v e d from t h e two f e d e r a l agencies involved i n their preparation: t h e Bureau o f Economic A n a l y s i s (U.S. Department of Commerce) and t h e Economic Research S e r v i c e (U.S. Department of Agriculture). These two f e d e r a l agencies a r e t h e p r i n c i p a l sources of the long-range projects of p o p u l a t i o n and demand f o r resources used b y t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .
I n the mathematical a n a l y s i s used i n t h e Maurnee R i v e r Basin Study, t h e base year d a t a c o n s i s t e d o f d a t a f r o m 1974 and 1975, and t h e 1990 d a t a p r o j e c t i o n came f r o m O B E R S Series-E projections. The p h y s i c a l include d a t a used i n t h e s t u d y i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e d r a i n a g e area, l a n d u s e and land a v a i l a b i l i t y o f t h e b a s i n f o r a g r i c u l t u r e and o t h e r l a n d a c t i v i t i e s , and h y d r o l o g i c and the pollution e f f l u e n t data for e x i s t i n g treatment f a c i l i t i e s plus their capacities and location. Various a g e n c i e s were t h e s o u r c e o f estimated data, such as the efectiveness of recreational d e v e l o p m e n t and f l o o d i n g p r e v e n t i o n . The Corps o f Engineers had r e c e n t l y completed a basinwide s t u d y o f h y d r o l o g i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e b a s i n and t h e i r i m p a c t s upon f l o o d no control. Consequent 1 y , additional hydrologic investigations were c o n d u c t e d .

Question 8a
No

Question 86
Yes. In particular, the land resources management cost optimization model, which was composed o f an a g r i c u l t u r a l land a management p r a c t i c e s submodel, r e c r e a t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t submodel, a w i l d l i f e p r e s e r v a t i o n submodel, and a f l o o d p l a i n a c q u i s i t i o n submodel, was r e s t r i c t e d t o b e i n g a l i n e a r model because o f the incomplete i n f o r m a t i o n o r data on these r e l a t e d subjects. I t was a p p a r e n t t h a t a water q u a l i t y p l a n n i n g model s h o u l d be developed, t a k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n c o n t r ib u t ions from point and non-point sources j o i n t l y . In this phase of the research, four cons i s t u e n t s were pol 1utant considered for intensive study. T.hese were s e d i m e n t , phosphorus f r o m point sources, phosphorus from distributed sources, and the b i o 1 og i ca 1 oxygen demand (BOD) 1 oad f r o m m u n i c i p a l and i n d u s t r i a l w a s t e discharges. However, t h i s i s n o t t o i m p l y t h a t o t h e r p o l l u t i n g substances a r e not important. The l a c k o f d a t a and a lack of knowledge of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e amount o f

-119-

d i s c h a r g e o f t h e s e c o n s t i t u e n t s and t h e r e s u l t i n g l e v e l o f water q u a l i t y p r e v e n t e d u s f r o m i n c l u d i n g them in the analysis.

Question 9
No.

Question 10
No.

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

4.

also provided input from their regular planning agencies. A l l needed p a s t r e c o r d s o f the states were made available. Loca 1 political entities provided cooperative support i n furnishi,ng meeting f a c i l i t i e s , p u b l i c notices, support and other genera 1 activities. The c o o p e r a t i o n was g e n e r a l l y adequate. However, more t i m e l y i n p u t w o u l d have been h e l p f u l from the federal agenc i es , particularly those dealing with environmental q u a l i t y . The s t u d y c o n d u c t e d b y t h e CWRU team was m o n i t o r e d by a c a r e f u l l y Comm i t t e e selected Adv i s o r y c o n s i s t i n g o f one member from e a c h of t h e f o l l o w i n g agencies: (i) the G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission (ii) Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e , t h e U.S. Economic R e s e a r c h S e r v i c e ( i i i ) t h e U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources D i v i s i o n , and (iv) the U.S. Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l . In addition, the Principal Investigator attended meetings o f the Advisory Committee, as d i d p r o j e c t o f f i c e r s f rom the National Sc i ence F o u n d a t ion--Res.earch Appl i e d to N a t i o n a l Needs Program, and t h e U . S . Department o f the Interior--Office o f Water R e s e a r c h and T e c h n o l o g y .

Question 1 7
The r e s o u r c e s o f t i m e f u n d s and personnel used i n the planning process have been d i s c u s s e d in P l a n n i n g Stage 1. An a d d i t i o n a l $100,000 was g r a n t e d by t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e F o u n d a t i o n and t h e O f f i c e o f Water Research and T e c h n o l o g y to support the CWRU multiobjective analysis r e s e a r c h a c t i v i t y used f o r the study. Various computing f a c i l i t i e s were e x t e n s i v e l y u s e d t o g e n e r a t e and c o n f i r m t h e d a t a needed and to analyze the objective trade-offs finally recommended by t h e CWRU r e s e a r c h team. A UNIVAC 1108 computer was used f o r the mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s .

Question 73
C i t i z e n i n v o l v e m e n t p l a y e d an important r o l e i n goal s e t t i n g , t h e definition of alternatives, the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f p r i o r i t i e s , and t h e formulation o f the f i n a l plans. One mechanism f o r public participation was t h e C i t i z e n ' s A d v i s o r y Committee (CAC), a n o n g o v e r n m e n t a l group o f thirty p r i v a t e c i t i z e n s from the t h r e e s t a t e s who w o r k e d c l o s e l y w i t h t h e government planners i n guiding p l a n development. The p r e l i m i n a r y a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s developed i n t h e f i r s t phase o f t h e s t u d y were reviewed and refined through a s e r i e s o f p u b l i c workshops h e l d in cities across the basin during 1974. Following October participation in this r e v i e w and f u r t h e r r e f i n e m e n t and agreement b y members, t h e C A C p u b l i s h e d i t s G o a l s R e p o r t (March, 1975)

Question 12
Institutional support was provided by the U.S. Water Resources C o u n c i l w i t h r e s p e c t t o funding o f the project by the federal government. The C o u n c i l a l s o o b t a i n e d responses f r o m t h e f e d e r a l agency and a t t e m p t e d w i t h o u t success t o r e s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e lukewarm c o o p e r a t i o n o f t h e U . S . EPA. The Great Lakes Bas i n Commission provided substantial a d d i t i o n a l support t o the study by providing specialized h e l p when needed and supplying additional manpower for public relations interaction with the Citizens' Advisory Committee. The states, furnished particularly Oh i 0 , top-level s u p p o r t where needed and

-120-

A series of open and i n f o r m a t i o n p u b l i c f o r u m s was h e l d 1976. i n eight c i t i e s i n January, The p u r p o s e o f t h e s e f o r u m s was t o r e v i e w t h e Economic Development and Environmental Quality Alternative Plans as starting points for d i s c u s s i o n o f what c i t i z e n s w o u l d l i k e t o see incorporated i n the A t the time o f the Final Plan. forums, w r i t t e n comments o n the alternative plans were a1 so solicited, and a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was m a i l e d t o e v e r y o n e on t h e Maumee Study m a i l i n g l i s t . The p u r p o s e o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was to quantify p u b l i c c h o i c e s and c o n c e r n s i n a way that would assist the planning process. The questionnaire, the of small work-group summar i es d i s c u s s i o n s t h a t took place during t h e forums, and t h e r e v i e w s and p r e f e r e n c e s s t a t e d b y t h e C A C were a l l used i n d e f i n i n g t h e F i n a l Plan and i n a s s i g n i n g r e l a t i v e p u b l i c priorities t o proposed programs. The F i n a l P l a n t h u s r e f l e c t s p u b l i c preferences for implementing programs and a d d r e s s i n g t h e water and r e l a t e d l a n d - r e s o u r c e needs o f t h e Maumee B a s i n .

were i d e n t i f i e d d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f the Study. The met hod of and ana 1 y s i s of d e v e Iopment alternative plans and of the Recommended Level-B Plan were o r i e n t e d t o w a r d t h e P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s f o r Water and R e l a t e d Land P1 a n n i ng. (Federal Resources 2 3 , 1973). R e g i s t e r , Sept. Programs were d e v e l o p e d f o r t h e of 1 and resources c a t e g o r i es management, eros ion and sed irnentat i o n , water qual i t y , w i l d l i f e , f i s h e r y resources, outdoor recreation, f l o o d i n g , water supply, and Maumee Bay. C o n s i d e r a t i o n was to structural and g i ven nonstructural solutions regardless o f whether t h e s o l u t i o n s w o u l d b e undertaken by t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r o r b y any o f s e v e r a l u n i t s and l e v e l s o f government.

Question 74
The Maumee C i t i z e n ' s A d v i s o r y Committee p r o v i d e d t h e g o a l s and objectives used i n f o r m u l a t i n g t h e alternative plans and the recommended c o u r s e o f a c t i o n . The d e t a i l e d development of the goals f o c u s e d on t h e f o l l o w i n g a r e a s o f concern: l a n d use and management, e r o s i o n and s e d i m e n t a t i o n c o n t r o l , w a t e r q u a l i t y management, f i s h and wildlife management, outdoor r e c r e a t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t , d r a i n a g e and f l o o d damage r e d u c t i o n , w a t e r s u p p l y development, management o f Maumee Bay, and l e g a l , i n s t i t u t i o n a l , and l e g i s l a t i v e issues. Throughout the Study, the a l t e r n a t i v e measures were r e f i n e d the and and r e e v a l u a t e d i n l i g h t o f g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s e s t a b l i s h e d by the Citizen's Advisory Committee. Over 560 m a j o r a l t e r n a t i v e measures t o s o l v e v a r i o u s resource problems

All practicable management measures, both structural and nonstructural, were s c r e e n e d for effectiveness, acceptability, and technical f e a s i b i l i t y f o r meeting p r o b l e m s , n e e d s , and o p p o r t u n i t i e s . P r eserva t i on, c o n s e r v a t i on, and d e v e l o p m e n t o f w a t e r and r e l a t e d land resources w e r e ' a l l considered. potentia 1 a1 t e r n a t i v e Var i ous components were not considered f u r t h e r because o f lack of public interest, 1 ack of econom i c j u s t i f i c a t i o n , o r due t o t e c h n i c a l considerations. I n b r i e f , more t h a n 560 a l t e r n a t i v e s were s u g g e s t e d b y the Citizens' Advisory Committee, t h e P l a n n i n g Committee, and the G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission. The Planning Board, i n general, decided upon the alternatives to be investigated i n detail.

Question 75:
The h i e r a r c h i e s and t h e v a r i o u s levels of responsibility for the decision-making process were 5 in d i s c u s s e d under Question Planning Stage 1. The P l a n n i n g Board was composed of planners who had utilized traditional methods i n developing plans f o r water r e s o u r c e s programs and projects. They were, in

-121-

general, not familiar w i t h the surrogate worth trade-off (SWT) method o r w i t h the hierarchical t e c h n i q u e s u t i l i z e d i n t h i s method. They q u e s t i o n e d the efficacy of developing a p l a n u t i l i z i n g these methods w h i c h r e l i e d upon the P a r e t o optimum o f the i n d i v i d u a l planner. They w e r e accustomed t o g i v i n g a s i n g l e answer, i n g e n e r a l , rather than a range o f Pareto optimal solutions. Consequently, the consul t a n t s from CWRU had i n i t i a l l y considerable d i f f i c u l t y i n s e c u r i n g f r o m i n d i v i d u a l members of the Planning Board their objectives and a n a r t i c u l a t i o n o f their subjective trade-offs. Many times a p e r s o n was u n a b l e t o a describe why he preferred s p e c i f i c s o l u t i o n and what he was w i l l i n g t o g i v e up t o achieve i t . Nevertheless, through iterative efforts, the objective trade-offs were g e n e r a t e d v i a t h e SWT method, with v a r i ous levels of decision-makers c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the surrogate worth trade-off functions. The trade-offs were obtained through an imp1 i c i t process that was explicitly e x p r e s s e d b y t h e SWT method. A procedure for obtaining trade-offs can b e f o u n d i n Haimes and H a l l ( 1 9 7 4 ) , Haimes (198O), and Chankong and Haimes (1982)

Plan i n the hydrologic basin could b e a d o p t e d as p a r t o f the Great Lakes B a s i n P l a n . O c c a s i o n a l gaps i n the data base f o r t h e Level-B S t u d y may present another methodological c o n s t r a i n t on implementation. The study methodology focused d i r e c t l y on t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g d a t a s o u r c e s and n o t on t h e c o l l e c t i o n of new and o r i g i n a l data. This factor, along w i t h the f a c t that t h i s study i s the f i r s t i n the basin t h a t takes a m u l t i o b j e c t i v e approach t o p l a n n i n g and a t t e m p t s of t o present a uniform level detail for each p l a n n i n g e l e m e n t , p r o v i d e s t h e reason f o r occasional d a t a gaps. These gaps may a c t a s a constraint on t h e l o c a l , county, or s t a t e o f f i c i a l who regional, seeks t o implement a L e v e l - B Plan recommended f o r a s p e c i f i c area. However, i t must b e r e c o g n i z e d t h a t where d a t a gaps and needs for additional s t u d i es have been i d e n t i f i e d , s p e c i f i c recommendaions t h e r e o n a r e embodied i n t h e L e v e l - B Plan. One maj o r 1egis 1a t i v e i n f l u e n c e on t h e development o f t h e water q u a l i t y p o r t i o n o f the Study i s t h e F e d e r a l Water Pollution Control A c t Amendments o f 1972 (P.L. 92-500). This federal act s e t s u p t h e framework f o r water quality planning thoughout the nation. The s t r u c t u r e o f t h e Study o r g a n i z a t i o n was one o f t h e most difficult factors, and i t p o s e d a natural c o n s t r a i n t t h a t every study member f a c e s c o n s t a n t l y . I t would be usefu1 to d e s c r i be the s t r u c t u r a l anatomy h e r e t o r e a l i z e t h e Study s i t u a t i o n . The Maumee R iv e r Bas i n P l a n n i n g Board c o n s i s t e d o f one member f r o m each o f t h e f o l l o w i n g agencies: The G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission ( w h i c h a l s o s e r v e d as the U.S. Study Manager) ; Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency; The U.S. Department of Agr i c u l t u r e , Soi 1 Conservation Service; t h e U.S. Army Corps o f

Question 16 Basically, t h e same s e t o f constraints described i n Question 4 extended its effect to this planning stage. Moreover, because of t h e complex, i n t e r s t a t e n a t u r e o f t h i s Level-B planning e f f o r t , the bas i n was decomposed into p l a n n i n g subareas consisting of groups o f c o u n t i e s . These p l a n n i n g subarea b o u n d a r i e s , a l t h o u g h u s e f u l for efficient econom i c and demographic d a t a c o l l e c t i o n , o f t e n did not coincide with the hydrologic boundaries. Therefore, some recommendations s e t f o r t h by t h e Level-B P l a n w o u l d have t o be s l i g h l y m o d i f i e d b e f o r e they could be i n t e g r a t e d i n t o o t h e r p l a n n i n g and r e s o u r c e agency e f f o r t s . For example, o n l y t h o s e p o r t i o n s o f t h e

-122-

Engineers: t h e U.S. Department o f the Interior, Bureau o f Outdoor Recreation; t h e Ohio E n v i r o n m e n t a l Protection Agency; the Indiana D e p a r t m e n t o f N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s ; and t h e M i c h i g a n Department o f Natural A S t e e r i n g Committee, Resources. made UP of higher-level representatives from the above a g e n c i e s , was c h a r g e d w i t h r e s o l v i n g possible conflicts among the a g e n c i e s a t P l a n n i n g B o a r d l e v e l and providing guidelines for policy issues.

The i n t e r a g e n c y s e t t i n g added t o t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e s t u d y team where t h e a g e n c i e s ' manpower and o t h e r r e s o u r c e s were made a v a i l a b l e to the study. However, th i s structure had rigidities and o b s t a c l e s , s u c h as t h e i n a b i l i t y o f several P l a n n i n g B o a r d members t o exercise t h e i r own professional judgements because t h e y were under their specific i n s t r u c t i o n s from supervisors or were bound by l o n g s t a n d i n g agency p o l i c i e s .

Question 77

The f o l l o w i n g m o d e l s w e r e used:

MORE mode 1 (Mu 1 t i p 1 e 1) t h e O b j e c t i v e Resources E v a l u a t i o n )

An a n a l y t i c a l linear programming model for agricultural analysis d e v e l o p e d b y t h e Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of A g r i c u l t u r a l , f o r g e n e r a l usage.

2)

t h e S T method W Trade-off)

(Surrogate

Worth

An analytical linear/nonlinear programming method for multiobject ive o p t i m i z a t io n a n a l ys i s developed b y Yacov Y . Haimes and Hall. Warren A .
A s i m u l a t i o n model f o r hydrological Army a n a l y s i s developed by the U.S. Corps of Engineers f o r general usage. A s i m u l a t i o n model f o r t h e s t u d y o f t h e Maumee Bay p r o b l e m s d e v e l o p e d b y t h e G r e a t Lakes E n v i r o n m e n t a l Ressearch Laboratory--National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Dr. A r t h u s Pinsak) (G LE R L -NO AA) for this project

3) h y d r o l o g i c a l f l o o d - p l a n models

4) t h e Maumee Bay S t u d y Model

5) t h e g e n e r a l i z e d r e d u c e d
mode 1

gradient

A effective nonlinear optimization n package--the generalized reduced g r a d i e n t (GRG) method was e x t e n s i v l y used i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e SWT method f o r the generation of Pareto-optimal s o l u t i o n s and t h e i r associated trade-offs.

-123-

The MORE (multiple-objective resource evaluation) model , d e v e l o p e d b y t h e Economic R e s e a r c h U.S. Department of S e r v i ce, was used e x t e n s i v e l y Agriculture, for modeling t h e d i s t r i b u t e d source pollution control, and i t s o u t p u t s were used to determine model coefficients. The MORE model was m o d i f i e d and e x t e n d e d t o include mu1 t i p o l l u t a n t (sed i ment and in our case) system phosphorus o b j e c t i v e s as w e l l as o t h e r related b u t noncommensurable o b j e c t i v e s such as r e c r e a t i o n and t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n of w i l d l i f e habitats.

Question 1%
The Maumee Bay s i m u l a t i o n model was constantly updated. The f l o o d p l a i n s i m u l a t i o n model was i n a reasonably mature s t a t e , r e q u i r i n g AI 1 the little modification. ana 1 y t i ca 1 mode 1 s (MORE, SWT, GRG) were w e l l tested, calibrated, and verified for d a t a c o n s i s t e n c y and o p t i m a l i t y of r e s u l t s .

Question 19
Most o f the f i n a l p l a n was b a s i c a l l y developed by t h e t e c h n i c a l experts working w i t h i n the limits s e t by t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s o f t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission, and they u t i l i z e d t o a great e x t e n t the p r e f e r e n c e s and o b j e c t i v e s o f the Citizens Advisory Committee w i t h respect t o the type o f p r o j e c t s needed i n s p e c i f i c a r e a s w i t h i n t h e basin. However, t h e GLBC d i d change some p o r t i o n s o f t h e p l a n d e v e l o p e d by the techpica1 experts before g i v i n g t h e i r approval.

The S t u d y p o i n t e d o u t the i rnpor t a n c e of some of the prerequisites for t h e success o f any interdisciplinary s t u d y , such as d e v e l o p i n g m u t u a l t r u s t among t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s and h e l p i n g e a c h participant to realize that within his own discipline he can contribute t o the overall study effort. Additional known c o n d i t i o n s f o r p r o j e c t success t h a t were i m p o r t a n t i n c l u d e d t h e m u t u a l development of cooperative s p i r i t among p a r t i c i p a n t s , so that the n a t u r a l b i a s among t h e d i s c i p l i n e s c o u l d b e overcome and p a r t i c i p a n t s c o u l d come t o t o l e r a t e o p p o s i n g approaches, and p o i n t s of view, beliefs. The t i m e needed f o r t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s t o d e v e l o p and m a t u r e and t h e f a c t t h a t almost every p a r t i c i p a n t j o i n e d t h e team w i t h h i s own p r e c o n c e i v e d n o t i o n o f w h a t constitutes a level-B planning s t u d y may e x p l a i n t h e t i m e s p e n t during the f ir s t phases in p h i l o s o p h i c a l and sometimes t r i v i a l d i s c u s s i ons I t i s here t h a t well-developed and acceptable guidelines for regional or r i v e r - b a s i n p l a n n i n g w o u l d have t h e most impact on s t r e a m l i n i n g t h e s e costly, time-consuming debates. Such g u i d e l i , n e s c o u l d i n t h e f u t u r e p r o v i d e a general framework and p l a t f o r m f o r an a c c e p t a b l e s t a r t i n g p o i n t i n t h e p l a n n i n g process.

5. Planning Stage 4: Development of Final Project Specifications

Question 2 1
G e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , l i n e a r and non1 i near programmi ng techniques were used to deal with the analytical m o d e l s and s i m u l a t i o n techniques were used in the s i m u l a t i o n m o d e l s (see Q u e s t i o n 1 7 ) . The m o s t t h e o r e t i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d (though quite straighforward) methodology used i n analyzing the Maumee R i v e r B a s i n m u l t i o b j e c t i v e problem was the surrogate worth t r a d e - o f f (SWT) method.

Question 20
The Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y was a p l a n n i n g e f f o r t t h a t was t r u l y interdisciplinary; however , an optimum m i x o f t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t s was n o t always a v a i l a b l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the environmental q u a l i t y f i e l d .

-124-

The b a s i n ' s p l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s were mathematically formulated w i t h i n the optimization framework. The submodels f o r l a n d management and w a t e r q u a l i t y r e p r e s e n t i n g one or more o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s were d e v e l o p e d and w e r e t h e n i n t e g r a t e d t o form the o v e r a l l m u l t i o b j e c t i v e p l a n n i n g model. Most of these integrated into the mode 1 s mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i on f r a m e w o r k w e r e d e v e l o p e d a t CWRU during the research period. The surrogate worth trade-off methods and i t s e x t e n s i o n s a r e d i s c u s s e d in d e t a i l i n t h e f o l l o w i n g a r t i c l e s and books : Y.Y. Haimes and W . A . Hall, "Mu1 t i - o b j e c t i v e s i n Water R e s o u r c e s Systems Analysis: The S u r r o g a t e Worth Trade-off Method," Water Resources Research, Vol. 10, No. 4, Aug. 1974

r e s o u r c e s and e n v i r o n m e n t a l s y s t e m s , because i t t a k e s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e s and g o a l s o f t h e system as w e l l as most o f the system's i n t e r a c t i o n s . Hierarchical m u l t i o b j e c t i v e analyses p r o v i d e a potent approach for a n a l y z i ng l a r g e - s c a l e systems i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e decision-making process.

A discussion optimal i t y can be Q u e s t i o n 26.

of found

mode 1 under

The CWRU r e s e a r c h team w o u l d recommend the use of the S T W approach in any similar study because o f the following special c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e method:

Y.Y. Haimes, W . A . Hall, and Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e F r eedman , H .T. Optimization in Water Resources The Surrogate Worth Sys tems : Trade-off Method, E 1 sev i e r , Amsterdam, 1975.
Y.Y. Haimes, Hierarchical A n a l y s e s o f Water R e s o u r c e s Systems: Modeling and Optimization of Large-scale Systems, McGraw-Hill , New Y o r k , 1977.
Y.Y. Haimes, "The Surrogate W o r t h T r a d e - o f f (SWT) Method and I t s Extensions," in Multiple Criteria Decision Making: Theory and G. F a n d e l and T . Applications, Gal, E d i t o r s , Springer-Verlag, New York, 1980, pp. 85-108

1. The SWT method p r o p e r l y leaves t o s p e c i a l i z e d a n a l y s i s the quantitative-predictive (scientific) a s p e c t s o f an e v a l u a t i o n b u t c l e a r l y g i v e s t h e decision-maker t h e r i g h t and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o e v a l u a t e t h e merits of improving any one objective a t t h e expense o f any other, given the associated q u a n t i t a t i v e l e v e l s o f achievement of a l l o b j e c t i v e s .
2. U s i n g t h e SWT method, the decision-maker interacts w i t h the systems a n a l y s t and t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l model a t a g e n e r a l and v e r y m o d e r a t e level. The decision-maker's preferences for a noninferior s o l u t i o n a r e c o n s t r u c t e d through the trade-off functions i n the objective f u n c t i o n space, which is familiar to most and mean i n g f u 1 decision-makers. Only then a r e they t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e d e c i s i o n space.

V. Chankong and Y . Y . Haimes, Mu1 i o b j e c t i v e Decision Making: Theory and and Methodology, Elsevier-North Holland, New Y o r k , 1983 ( i n p r e s s ) Hierarchical-multiobjective modeling i s a n a t u r a l approach t h a t i s r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e l a r g e s c a l e and s u c h systems as t h e complexity of Maumee R i v e r B a s i n . T h i s approach is essential for handling the planning of large-scale water

3. Since the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of optimal preferences which lead t o a s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f t h e best-compromise solution (also c a l l e d the preferred is direct with the solution) d e c i s i o n - m a k e r , t h e SWT method i s v e r y w e l l s u i t e d t o t h e a n a l y s i s and of mu1 t i o b j e c t i ve o p t i m iz a t ion mu1 t i p l e functions hav i ng decision-makers.
4.The SWT method p r o v i d e s f o r a quantitative ana 1 y s i s of o b j ec t i ve noncommensurable

-125-

5. When the number of objective functions i s three or more, t h i s method has an a p p r e c i a b l e computational advantage over o t h e r e x i s t i n g methods (Cohon and H a r k s 1975 1 *
Question 22
Where s u f f i c i e n t data were avai lable, m o n e t a r y b e n e f i t s and c o s t s were computed. The c o s t e d elements o f the p l a n s include both facilities and programs of a governmental or group type, and t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l programs t h a t a r e normally f u l l y or p a r t i a l l y financed from p u b l i c f u n d s . Capital costs were calculated for both installation and t e c h n i ca 1 assistance expenses, and they i n c l u d e l a b o r , m a t e r i a l s , equipment, rights-of-way, water rights, engineering, and administration. Other capital cost categories include a g r i c u l t u r a l erosion-control implementation, technical studies, and a c q u i s i t i o n and d e v e l o p m e n t o f recreation sites. The capital projects were c o n v e r t e d t o annual costs using a 50-year l i f e a t the then-current federal discount rate o f 6 318 percent. Exceptions t o t h i s were waste-water and muni c i pa 1 storm-water treatment facilities, w h i c h w e r e c o s t e d f o r a 20-year 1 ife. Operations, maintenance, and replacement (OMSR) costs r e f e r t o t h e annual c o s t f o r upkeep and management of in-place capital i tems. Annual costs are also calculated for projects not requiring a first-time capital expense. They include average annual costs, such as t h o s e f o r administration of land resources, and t a x l o s s r e s u l t i n g f r o m o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n development. These c o s t s have been averaged for the fifteen-year period. For example, the operation, maintenance, and replacement c o s t s i n the p l a n a r e t h e average monetary o u t l a y s d u r i n g t h e f i f t e e n years r a t h e r than f o r t h e development i n p l a c e i n t h e year

Benefits of the alternative p l a n s were d e v e l o p e d i n a c c o r d a n c e with Principles and S t anda r d s guidelines. Where s u f f i c i e n t d a t a were a v a i l a b l e , t h e s e b e n e f i t s were quantified. This i n c l u d e d such i t e m s as d o l l a r s o f a n n u a l flood damages p r e v e n t e d ; dollar value o f t h e h u n t i n g , f i s h i n g and r e c r e a t i o n days p r o v i d e d by t h e p l a n ; and increased income accruing to residents of t h e b a s i n as a r e s u l t at the of i n c r e a s e d employment construction projects suggested by the plan.

Question 23
An i m p a c t a n a l y s i s , c a l l e d an environmental i m p a c t a n a l y s i s , was made i n a p r e l i m i n a r y o r g e n e r a l i z e d fashion. No r i s k analysis was undertaken, except t h a t which might be assumed for flood control projects where protection from flooding for different frequencies was indicated. Risk a n a l y s i s might have b e e n d e s i r a b l e f o r a greater p o r t i o n o f t h e measures p r o p o s e d i n t h e p l a n had a d e q u a t e information been a v a i l a b l e upon w h i c h t o b a s e such an a n a l y s i s . An e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s t a t e m e n t was r e q u i r e d by f e d e r a l law and p r o v i d e d a b a s i s f o r judgment o f the efficacy of the s e v e r a l elements o f t h e p l a n .

Question 2 4
The P l a n n i n g Board members w e r e the principal decision-makers involved in the selection of preferred plans. They u t i l i z e d a l l information available to them, CWRU including input from the r e s e a r c h team c o n c e r n i n g t h e P a r e t o optimum of the multiobjective optimization problem and the Citizens' A d v i s o r y Committee w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r recommendations and of the the ultimate selection National Economic Development (NED) Qua 1 i t y (EQ) and Env i ronrnenta 1 portions of the plan. The G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission e n t e r e d i n t o the selection of elements o f the f i n a l p l a n by s e l e c t i n g t h e p o r t i o n s of t h e N E D and EQ e l e m e n t s t o b e incorporated in the final recommended.plan.

1990.

-126-

In the mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e optimization scheme (the S T W method), , t h e t r a d e - o f f v a l u e between t functions, the i andjthobjective xij, p r o v i d e d a b r o a d base of i n f o r m a t i o n , a l l o f w h i c h was needed i n t h e p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g I t has been shown t h a t process.

= - -

afi
af
j

'ij

u n l e s s t h e y a r e g i v e n i n terms o f d o l l a r s per u n i t o f t h e j t h o b j e c t i v e . That i s t o say, i n a p p l y i n g t h e S T W method, i t i s p r e f e r a b l e t o h a v e t h e primary objective f u n c t i o n be t h e c o s t (or b e n e f i t ) f u n c t i o n , g i v e n i n monetary u n i t s , w h i l e a l l other objectives in the -constraint f o r m u l a t i o n a r e i n t h e i r own u n i t s . Two o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e i n order a t t h i s time.

These t r a d e - o f f values were generated simultaneously w i t h the is Pareto-optimum solutions. I t q u i t e important t o note t h a t the and the trade-off v a 1 ues corresponding Pareto-optimum s o l u t i o n s can be r e a d i l y u t i l i z e d i n the decision-making p r o c e s s even without generating the surrogate w o r t h f u n c t i o n s t h a t t h e SWT method calls for. I n o t h e r words, while t h e S T method i n i t s e l f i s composed W o f s e v e r a l c o n s e c u t i v e phases, i t i s n o t m a n d a t o r y t o a c t i v a t e a l l phases t o u s e t h e method. This f a c t i s of paramount importance f o r analysts and u s e r s who m i g h t n o t n e c e s a r i l y a p p r e c i a t e t h e way t h e S T method W calls for interaction between a n a l y s t s and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s , a n d / o r the generation of the surrogate worth functions.

of the i) The preference P l a n n i n g Board f o r monetary u n i t s i s not unexpected s i n c e p e o p l e do u s u a l l y make d e c i s i o n s on t r a d e - o f f s is u s i n g t h e d o l l a r as a b a s i s . I t much e a s i e r f o r a P l a n n i n g Board member t o r e l a t e h i s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d an alternative plan when the trade-off value is given in $/ton-sediment rather than bushels of corn/ton-sediment or v i s i t o r - d a y / b u s h e l of corn.

A l l s t u d e n t s o f economics (and most, i f n o t a l l water resources planners belong i n t h i s category) are familiar w i t h and u s e t h e c o n c e p t o f m a r g i n a l b e n e f i t and c o s t i n their analysis. The t r a d e - o f f values essentially represent the marginal v a l u e concept w i t h the exception t h a t t h e numerator might n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be g i v e n i n monetary units. I n o t h e r words, while the "classical" marginal b e n e f i t might be g i v e n i n t e r m s o f d o l l a r s p e r t o n of sediment, the trade-off value m i g h t be g i v e n i n terms o f bushels of c r o p per t o n o f sediment.
The e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n P l a n n i n g B o a r d shows t h a t w h i l e the generation o f the t r a d e - o f f v a l u e s i n terms o f u n i t s o f the ithobjective per u n i t s of the jth o b j e c t i v e is possible and a n a l y t i c a l l y elegant, these values are not useful t o the planners

i i ) The above r e f e r e n c e i n a trade-off presentation does n o t impose any h a r d s h i p on t h e S T W method. I t i s always p o s s i b l e t o select the monetary objective f u n c t i on in a multiobjective o p t i m i z a t i o n p r o b l e m as t h e p r i m a r y in the E-constraint o b j e c t iv e formulation. I f such does not e x i s t , t h e n one s h o u l d s e l e c t as t h e primary objective, that objective which can serve as a common denominator for a trading base. i t i s always p o s s i b l e Furthermore, t o g e n e r a t e a1 1 p o s s i b l e t r a d e - o f f s between any two o b j e c t i v e s o n c e t h e s e t \2.-. nl A i s generated.Thiscan be done, as was m e n t i o n e d , by u s i n g t h e formula

The avai labi 1 i t y to the planners o f the trade-off values a t c o r r e s p o n d i n g l e v e l s o f achievement of v a r i o u s o b j e c t i v e s can s e r v e s e v e r a l v e r y i m p o r t a n t purposes in the p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g process. Among t h e s e a r e : i) The identification and recognition o f the characteristics with each planning assoc i a t e d

-127-

subarea (PSA) - - h y d r o l o g i c , geographic-morphologic, land and soi 1 types, econom i c , socio-economic, and o t h e r s . This type o f i n f o r m a t i o n should a s s i s t the planner in maximizing the allocation of resources on a bas i n w i d e bas i s within the u n a v o i d a b l e c o n s t r a i n t s and thus enhance t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f a c h i e v i n g t h e p l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s and g o a l s . ii) The s e n s i t i v i t y in the changes of the trade-off values among t h e a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s are v a 1 uab 1 e i n f o r m a t i on to the planners. I n summary, w h i l e t h e t r a d e - o f f values are essential in the generation o f the surrogate worth functions v i a i n t e r a c t i o n between a n a l y s t and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and t h e u l t i m a t e generation of a selected, p r e f e r r e d , and a c c e p t a b l e p l a n u s i n g t h e S T method i n i t s e n t i r e t y , W it i s possible t o u t i l i z e the trade-off v a l u e s and t o deduce many s e p a r a t e conclusions that can be very valuable to the planners and decision-makers. I n the applications of the s u r r o g a t e w o r t h - t r a d e o f f method i n t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y , the method's f i n a l phase, namely, t h e generation of the surrogate worth functions, was implemented. The intent of these f u n c t i o n s is to essentially assist i n representing t h e decision-makers' preferences i n the selection of the final recommended p l a n . I n t h i s study, t h e r e was a continuous and. close interaction between the analysts and the decision-makers a t v a r i o u s l e v e l s o f the decision-making hierarchy. Each of these levels had i t s own i n f l u e n c e and i m p a c t on t h e s t u d y outcome. Very . o f t e n , t h e a n a l y s t s were t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t h e m s e l v e s . The h i e r a r c h y o f decision-makers consisted of t h e P l a n n i n g Board members and t h e i r c l o s e a s s o c i a t e s , who i n t u r n c e n t r a l i z e d t h e d a t a and provided the needed technical i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e P l a n n i n g Board this members. In add i t i o n ,

h i erarchy i n c 1 uded the Study Manager, his staff, and his associates a t the executive level o f t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission, t h e G r e a t L a k e s B a s i n Commission i-tself, the Citizens' Advisory Committee, t h e S t u d y Committee, the Steering Committee, the Water Resources Council, the public t h r o u g h v a r i o u s h e a r i n g s , and o t h e r a g e n c i e s who w e r e n o t r e p r e s e n t e d i n the above groups of the decision-makers but who have influence i n the region. I n summary, o f a l l levels of the decision-making hierarchy i n the Maumee L e v e l - B Study, t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d and t h e S t u d y Manager had t h e most i m p a c t on t h e s t u d y outcome. Consequently, in generating the surrogate worth trade-off functions, namely, the preferences of the decision-makers over the various a l t e r n a t i v e Pareto optimal plans, only t h e P l a n n i n g Board ( t h e S t u d y Manager i s t h e chairman of the Board) was requested t o s t a t e i t s preferences. T h i s was done by s o l i c i t i n g t h e p r e f e r e n c e s o f each P 1 ann i ng Board member. The r e s u l t i n g i n d i f f e r e n c e bands o f e a c h P l a n n i n g B o a r d member d i d n o t a l w a y s o v e r l a p , as w o u l d b e e x p e c t e d . In c o m p a r i n g t h e f i n a l recommended p l a n and t h e d i s p l a y e d p r e f e r e n c e s o f t h e B o a r d members, however, i t becomes evident that t h i s plan coincides w i t h the preferences o f t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d members. I t i s very d i f f i c u l t a t t h i s t i m e t o a c c u r a t e l y assess t h e impact that the generation of the preferences (via the surrogate worth f u n c t i o n s ) had on t h e p l a n w h i c h was I t recommended f o r f i n a l s e l e c t i o n . i s much e a s i e r , however, t o assert that the availability of the trade-off v a l u e s among t h e v a r i o u s objectives and t h e corresponding Pareto-optimal solutions were extremely valuable i n helping the decision-makers understand and analyze the various a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s and u t l i m a t e l y h e l p e d g e n e r a t e a recommended p l a n t h a t i s more A r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e b a s i n ' s needs. major gap between t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s and t h e implementation of

-128-

t h e r e s u l t i n g p l a n s was d i s c o v e r e d as a consequence o f the generation and d i s p l a y o f t h e t r a d e - o f f v a l u e s as t h e y r e l a t e d t o the various p l a n n i n g subareas.

Question 26
Recognition o f the f a c t that t h e term " o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n ' ' p e r t a i n s t o t h e m o d e l ' s o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n and not necessarily t o the r e a l system's o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n would h e l p reduce some of the misgivings o f the p r a c t i o n e r s and a t t h e same t i m e help the m o d e l e r s and a n a l y s t s d e v e l o p a more sober a t t i t u d e t o w a r d the phrase. Furthermore, the model's optimal s o l u t i o n and t h e v a r i o u s s c e n a r i o s and a l t e r n a t i v e plans that c o u l d be g e n e r a t e d v i a t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l models s h o u l d b e i n v a l uab 1 e tool s in the decision-making process i n general and i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g i n For t h e Maumee R i v e r particular. B a s i n Level-B Study, the "optimal solution" of the real system depended upon t h e v a l u e system o f the decision-makers. The a l t e r n a t i v e s were n o t e v a l u a t e d on a common b a s i s , such as d o l l a r s t o be compared d i r e c t l y a g a i n s t c o s t , b u t u t i l i z e d output, such as acres prevented from f l o o d i n g , visitor days, e t c . Consequently, t h e SWT method provided as good an evaluation o f the r e l a t i v e merits o f the multiple objectives as was available. The d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s were at first reluctant t o accept t h e results of t h e S T method W but, l a c k i n g a m o r e d e f i n i t i v e method o f t h e i r own and b e i n g r e q u i r e d b y t h e SWT p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o s t a t e t h e i r p r e f e r e n c e s more s u c c i n c t l y , they derived a b e n e f i t f r o m t h e SWT method in dec i d i ng which a l t e r n a t i v e s t o recommend.

Question 25.
A hierarchical multiobjective m o d e l i n g and o p t i m i z a t i o n s t r u c t u r e was developed for handling c o m p r e h e n s i v e p l a n n i n g i n t h e Maumee River Basin. Two m a j o r components o f noncommensuration were i d e n t i f i e d in modeling the problem: one r e l a t e s t o economic o b j e c t i v e s and the other t o environmental q u a l i t y as a f f e c t e d b y p o i n t and n o n p o i n t source pollutants, recreation, w i l d l i f e , etc.
A computer p r o g r a m was w o r k e d o u t whch i s capable o f g e n e r a t i n g a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s and p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s and their associated trade-offs using the surrogate worth trade-off method. The a n a l y s i s was c a r r i e d out w i t h r e s p e c t t o each o f t h e f i v e p l a n n i n g subareas t h a t a r e based on s t a t e and c o u n t y b o u n d a r i e s i n the basin. The level of objectives and appropriate trade-offs among the various a o b j e c t i v e s were d e t e r m i n e d f o r range o f f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e plans: minimum environmental q u a l i t y (EQ), EQ, economic development (ED), minimum E D , and a recommended p l a n . As i n f e r r e d b y name, minimum E Q p l a c e s somewhat l e s s emphasis on environmental q u a l i t y i n comparison with t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l q u a l i t y (EQ) p l a n , w h i l e minimum E D p l a c e s l e s s emphasis on economic d e v e l o p m e n t i n compar i s o n with the econom i c d e v e 1 opment (ED) p 1 an. The S T method m i g h t b e v i e w e d W at this stage of the planning p r o c e s s as a " s i m u l a t i o n " method. This d i s t i n c t a t t r i b u t e of the SWT method i s n o t a b l e i n l i g h t o f the present proliferation of mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e methodologies developed for water resources p l ann i ng

Question 27
The P l a n n i n g B o a r d made i t s recommendations to the Bas i n Commission and furnished the comments o f t h e C i t i z e n s ' Advisory Committee o n t h e s e v e r a recommended alternatives. The Bas n Commission h e l d a s e r i e s o f p u b l i c meetings t o o b t a i n the views o f the general public i n a d d i t i o n t o those o f t h e C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y Comm t t e e who, by and l a r g e , a t t e n d e d t h e m e e t i n g s i n

-129-

their own a r e a s t o make t h e f i n a l recommendations f o r transmittal to their governors and t h e Water Resources C o u n c i l .

Question 28
This question implies funding for the implementation of the f i n a l plan. The f i n a l plan was not implemented n o r was i t f i n a n c e d f o r implementation. However, as r e c e n t l y as 1982, t h e s t a t e o f Ohio I S continuing to evaluate recommendations f o r w a t e r resources projects i n the basin i n r e l a t i o n t o the i n f o r m a t i o n presented i n the plan t o assist i n the judgmental processes f o r approval o f plans. Therefore, whi l e no direct is implementation of the plan i n v o l v e d , i t i s b e i n g u t i l i z e d as a s t a n d a r d f r o m w h i c h t o gauge o t h e r plans.

s t a t e s i n c o n s i d e r i n g work t o be endorsed. The recommendations w i t h regard t o types o f agricultural p r a c t i c e s t o be u n d e r t a k e n a r e b e i n g i n t r o d u c e d t o an i n c r e a s i n g degree throughout the basin.

6. Planning Stage 5: Design Question 30

Project

Q u e s t i o n 30 does n o t a p p l y t o the state of planning or the level of planning f o r t h e Maumee R i v e r Basin Study.

Acknowledgements
P a r t i a l support f o r t h i s study was p r o v i d e d b y t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e ENG79-03605, Foundation, G r a n t No. under the project titles, "The I n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e H i e r a r c h i c a l and Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Approaches," and t h e the U n i t e d S t a t e s Department o f Energy, Contract No. DEACO-180RA50256, u n d e r t h e p r o j e c t title, "Industry Functional M o d e l i n g . " S p e c i a l t h a n k s a r e due t o J u l i a Pet-Edwards f o r h e r a s s i s t a n c e i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s document.

Question 29
No systematic post-planning e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e o v e r a l l p l a n has been c o m p l e t e d t o t h e knowledge o f t h e f o r m e r B a s i n Commission s t a f f . Some p o s t - p l a n n i n g e v a l u a t i o n has been undertaken i n each o f the

References
Chankong, V., and Y . Y . Ha i mes , M u l t i o b j e c t i v e D e c i s i o n Making: Theory and Methodo 1 ogy , Elsevier-North Holland, New Y o r k , 1983 ( i n p r e s s C i titens' Advisory Committee, " T e n t a t i v e G o a l s and O b j e c t i v e s : Maumee R iver Bas i ns Leve 1 -B S t u d y , " MRB S e r . 2, G r e a t Lakes Basin Commission, Ann A r b o r , M i c h , 1974. Das, P . , "H i e r a r c h i c a 1 -mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e approach i n t h e p l a n n i n g and management o f w a t e r and r e l a t e d 1 and resources ,I' Ph.D. dissertation, Case Western Reserve U n i v e r s i t y , Cleveland, O h i o , 1976. G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Cornmission, "A F irst-Cut Presentation of Planning, Maumee R i v e r Basin 4, Ann L e v e l - B S t u d y , " MRB S e r . Arbor, Mich., 1974. G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission,"Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y , " 113 p p . , Ann A r b o r , M i c h . , May 1977. Great Lakes Basin Commission, R iv e r Bas i n S t u d y ,I ' "Maumee Report-Environmental Impact S t a t e m e n t , May 1977. Haimes,Y.Y. and W.A. Hal 1 , "Mu 1 t i o b j e c t i v e s in Water R e s o u r c e s Systems A n a l y s i s : The Surrogate Worth Trade-off Water Resources Method, I ' 10, No. 4, Aug. Research, v o l .

1974.

-130-

Haimes, Y . Y . , W . A . H a l l , and H.T. F r eedman, Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e s Optimization i n Water R e s o u r c e s Systems: The S u r r o g a t e W o r t h E 1 sev i e r , Trade-off Method, Amsterdam, 1975. Haimes, Y . Y . , Hierarchical Analyses of Water R e s o u r c e s Systems: M o d e l i n g and O p t i m i z a t i o n of Large-scale Sys tems, M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k , 1977. Haimes, Y . Y . , P. Das, K . Sung, and J. Craig, "Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Analysis i n t h e Maumee R i v e r A Case S t u d y o n L e v e l - B Basin: P 1 ann i ng, I ' Sys tems Eng i n e e r i n g D e p a r t m e n t , Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e U n i v e r s i t y , J a n u a r y 1977. Haimes, Y . Y . , P. Das, and K . Sung, "Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e A n a l y s i s i n t h e Maumee River Basin: A Case S t u d y o n L e v e l - B P l a n n i n g , " Case Western Reserve University, C l e v e l a n d , O h i o , 1977. Haimes, Y . Y . , P. Das, and K . Sung, "Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Ana 1 y s i s i n t h e Maumee River Basin: A Case Study," Case W e s t e r n Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio,

Putman, J.W., "Multiple Objective Resource Evaluation System (MORE) , I ' N o r t h C e n t r a l Resource Program Group, Economic Research U.S. Department o f Service, Agriculture, East Lans i ng, M i c h . , 1975. S o i l Conservation Service, "Erosion and Sedimentation Technical Paper , I ' submi t t e d t o t h e G r e a t Lansing, Lakes B a s i n Comm., E . Mich., 1974. Sung , K. , "Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Optimization and H i e r a r c h i c a l Overlapping Coordination in Water R e s o u r c e s System,'' Ph.D. dissertation, Case Western Reserve U n i v e r s i t y , Cleveland, Ohio, 1978.

U.S.

Congress, "Federal P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l Act," Law 92-500, 1972.

Water Public

Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l , Principles and S t a n d a r d s f o r P l a n n i n g Water and R e l a t e d Land Resources, Fed. Regist., 3 8 ( 1 7 4 ) , p a r t I l l , 24, 77-24,869, S e p t . 10, 1973. Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l , 1 9 7 2 , OBERS Projections: Economic A c t i v i t y b y Economic Area, i n t h e U.S. Water Resources Region and Subarea, S t a t e s , and SMSA and Non-SMSA P o r t i o n s o f t h e Areas, H i s t o r ica 1 and Projected 1929-2020, report, Washington, D.C., 1974.

.1979.
Haimes, Y . Y . (editor), Scientific, T e c h n o l o g i c a l , and I n s t i t u t i o n a l Aspects of Water Resources P o l i c y , Westview P r e s s , B o u l d e r , C O ~ O . , 1980. Haimes, Y . Y . , "The S u r r o g a t e Worth Trade-off (SWT) Method and I t s Extensions," in Mu1 t i p l e Criteria Decision Mak i ng: G. Theory and Applications, Fandel and T. Gal, editors, S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New Y o r k , 1980, pp. 85-108.

-131-

THE PLANNING PROCESS IN THE METROPOLITAN ADELAIDE WATER RESOURCES STUDY OF JUNE 1978

David T. Howell Department of Water Engineering School of Civil Engineering The University of New South Wales Kensington, N e w South Wales Australia

Introduction
Adelaide is the capital c i t y and t h e l a r g e s t c i t y o f t h e s t a t e of South A u s t r a l i a , w h i c h is the d r i e s t state of the country which occupies the wor I d ' s driest c o n t i n e n t (see F i g u r e ) Metropo i t a n Adelaide had in 1982 a p o p u l a t i o n o f a l m o s t one million I t draws i t s w a t e r from storage o n n e a r b y s t r e a m s and, increasingly, from the c o m p a r a t i v e l y l a r g e and r e l i a b l e f l o w o f t h e R i v e r M u r r a y . However, w a t e r f r o m t h e R i v e r Murray i s more s a l i n e and more t u r b i d t h a n f r o m t h e nearby streams.
1. Planning Project Initiation and Planning

Stage 1: Preliminary

Question I
The p r o j e c t was i n i t i a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f a l o n g - t e r m programme. The M e t r o p o l i t a n A d e l a i d e Water Resources S t u d y , begun i n 1976 and completed in 1978, was an investigation i n t o how t o p r o v i d e a water SUPP 1 Y for m e t r o p o l i t a n A d e l a i d e over t h e n e x t 30 y e a r s .

amongst other things, throughout the state. I t s Director-General and E n g i n e e r - i n - C h i e f i s c u r r e n t l y the Cha i rman of the South A u s t r a l i a n Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l , on which a number of bodies concerned with water are r e p r e s e n t e d , and w h i c h i s c o n c e r n e d w i t h an i n t e g r a t e d approach to water r e s o u r c e s management f o r t h e state. The E n g i n e e r i n g and Water Supply Department also interacts w i t h t h e R i v e r M u r r a y Commission, a body on w h i c h a r e r e p r e s e n t e d t h e governments o f t h e s t a t e s o f South Australia, V i c t o r i a and New S o u t h W 1 es a and the Commonwealth Government ( t h e f e d e r a l government of Australia). The R i v e r M u r r a y Commission a d m i n i s t e r s t h e R i v e r Murray Waters Agreement (an inter-state compact) which a l l o c a t e s among t h e s t a t e s w a t e r from t h e R i v e r Murray on which A d e l a i d e depends h e a v i l y . The s k i l l e d p e r s o n n e l i n v o l v e d i n the planning process were e n g i n e e r s and an e n g i n e e r - e c o n o m i s t o f t h e E n g i n e e r i n g and Water S u p p l y Department. Public participation was n o t e x p l i c i t l y i n v o l v e d i n t h e formu 1 a t i on o f p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s , b u t r e p o r t s o n t h e s t u d y were made a v a i l a b l e f o r p u b l i c s c r u t i n y and comment. T h e r e has been s u b s e q u e n t i n v o 1 vement in demand pub1 i c management and i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of a corporate plan for the Department. (See a l s o t h e answer t o Question 13).

Question 2
The only agency directly i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o j e c t was the Engineering and Water Supply I t Department o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a . was r e s p o n s i b l e a t t h e t i m e of t h e s t u d y t o t h e M i n i s t e r o f Works and i s now r e s p o n s i b l e t o t h e M i n i s t e r of Water Resources (of the Government o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a ) f o r r u r a l and u r b a n w a t e r supplies,

Question 3
The i n v e s t i g a t i o n , w h i c h l e d t o a programme o f recomendations f o r works c o n s t r u c t i o n over a p e r i o d o f

-132-

t i m e and f o r particular operating policies, was initiated by a r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t the q u a l i t y of the w a t e r s u p p l y had t o be improved, that public f u n d s were becoming s c a r c e and w e r e l i k e l y t o remain scarce for many years, that continuing supply t o the c i t y of A d e l a i d e was becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y dependent o f t h e R i v e r Murray, and that the r a t e o f p o p u l a t i o n growth o f t h e c i t y had d e c l i n e d s i n c e t h e completion o f t h e p r e v i o u s major i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n 1973.

Question 7
E x i s t i n g d a t a were supplemented 50 separate sets of with s y n t h e t i c a l l y generated data. Each 5et consisted of generated streamflows a t ten l o c a t i o n s and generated demands at eight locations. The demands were d e r i v e d from generated rainfall and rainfall/consumption correlations. N e t e v a p o r a t i o n l o s s e s were a l s o generated. F o r e c a s t s o f demand o v e r t h e p l a n n i n g p e r i o d were made.
A l l measurements are being continued d u r i n g the construction w i l l be continued period and indefinitely into the future.

Question 4
The only constraints were self-imposed. They w e r e t h a t the s t u d y s h o u l d b e c o m p l e t e d i n two years, and t h a t i t s h o u l d d e a l w i t h t h e problem o f providing Adelaide w i t h w a t e r o v e r t h e n e x t 30 y e a r s .

Question 8
Operations research techniques were n o t u s e d t o d e c i d e o n t h e method of data c o l l e c t i o n and length of data.

Question 5
The methods employed were d e v e l o p e d by t h e o f f i c e r s o f the Department, most 1 y younger engineers. There were no disagreements.

Question 9
A programme was n o t s e t u p t o assess t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f t h e d a t a b a s e used.

2. Planning Stage 2: Data Collection and Processing

Question 10
No s p e c i a l methods t o analyse t h e data

Question 6
D a t a used c o m p r i s e d : S t r e a m f l o w and r a i n f a l l r e c o r d s f o r t h e Adelaide Region ( t h e area o f l o c a l supply) ; Streamflow R i v e r Murray; records for the

were

used

3. Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

Question 7 7
The e n t i r e study (Planning 1 to 4 inclusive) took Stages approximately ten man-years of p r o f e s s i o n a l e f f o r t w i t h about t h e same amount of sub-professional support. The s t u d y was internally funded as p a r t o f the ordinary Use e x p e n d i t u r e of t h e D e p a r t m e n t . was made o f the South A u s t r a l i a n Data Government's Automatic Processing Centre which had a C o n t r o l D a t a Cyber 7 3 .

Consumption r e c o r d s f o r w a t e r i n A d e l a i d e f o r d i f f e r e n t consumer c l a s s e s and s u b - a r e a s ( o v e r t h e a r e a o f consumption) ; E v a p o r a t i o n and r a i n f a l l for different locations Adelaide a t r e p r e s e n t i n g d i f f e r e n t sub-areas; Population records i n d i f f e r e n t sub-a r eas (and population

-133-

Question 12
The o n l y s u p p o r t from ouside t h e D e p a r t m e n t was a s s i s t a n c e i n making p o p u l a t i o n forecasts by o t h e r s t a t e government d e p a r m e n t s .

Question 17
Multi-dimensional simulation w i t h time d i s c r e t i z e d i n t o months and w i t h s y n t h e t i c a l l y generated i n p u t s was u s e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h hierarchical two- 1 e v e 1 decomposition and deterministic dynamic p r o g r a m m i n g f o r s u b - s y s t e m optimization. The hierarchica! d e c o m p o s i t i o n was a d a p t e d f r o m t h e a p p r o a c h p r o p o s e d b y Haimes and Macko (1973) The dynamic programming model was d e v e l o p e d t o s u i t the circumstances of the problem. The o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n was t o m i n i m i z e pumping c o s t s o v e r t h e 30-year p l a n n i n g p e r i o d s u b j e c t to system component capaci t y constraints and minimum t a r g e t storage levels representing levels o f s e c u r i t y or r i s k .

Question 13
The p u b l i c d i d n o t p a r t i c i p a t e in the planning and at all decisionm a k i n g p r o c e s s , because, so f a r , the issues have been simple, t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s s i m i l a r i n their social and e n v i r o n m e n t a l impacts, and non-one's special i n t e r e s t s have y e t been s e r i o u s l y threatened. The E n g i n e e r i ng and Water S u p p l y Department is not averse t o p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n ; i t i n i t i a t e d a pub1 i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n programme i n 1976 i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h R i v e r Murray s a l i n i t y c o n t r o l ( A l l e n and K i l l i c k , 1979).

Question 18
To t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e m o d e l s d e a l t w i t h v o l u m e s o f w a t e r and c o s t s o f pumping, c a l i b r a t i o n and verification were n o t r e q u i r e d . Testing and modification were concerned with computational e f f i cacy

Question 14
Thirteen d i s t i n c t alternatives were investigated, al 1 in sufficient detal 1 to enable " i n d i c a t i v e " c o s t s t o be e s t i m a t e d . The a l t e r n a t i v e s c o n s i d e r e d were d e c i d e d o n b y t h e members o f the s t u d y team as an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f the study.

Question 19
The e x p e r t s recommended t h e f i r s t stages o f a f i n a l p l a n - and the deferment o f some d e c i s i o n s until later t o the Minister. The M i n i s t e r and t h e S o u t h A u s t r a l i a n Government accepted the recommendations. The p u b l i c was informed, and t h e r e was no a d v e r s e reaction.

Question 15
The s t a n d a r d p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g procedure o f t h e Department was f o l lowed whereby the project is c o n t i nua 1 1 y as it d i scussed progresses w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n f l o w i n g upwards t h r o u g h t h e h i e r a r c h y o f responsibility to sen io r management. I n t h i s case t h e v i e w s f l o w i n g back down t h e h i e r a r c h y were c o n f i r m a t o r y . In addition, e v e r y month b r i e f summaries of p r o g r e s s were s e n t t o t h e South A u s t r a l i a n Water Resources C o u n c i l These and to the Minister 1 it t l e resu1 ted in very disagreement.

Question 20
The p l a n n i n g team was composed mostly o f engineers. The m a j o r i t y were c i v i l e n g i n e e r s , b u t t h e r e was one electrical engineer w i t h a specialisation in operational research. One of the civil e n g i n e e r s was a l s o an e c o n o m i s t . Other d i s c i p l i n e s were i n v o l v e d i n population forecasting. To t h i s extent the study was interdisciplinary, with the mix seeming t o be a p p r o p r i a t e .

Question I 6
No c o n s t r a i n t s were
rnposed.

-134-

4. Planning Stage 4: Development of Final Project Specifications

Question 21
In and 4 answer answers
t h i s s t u d y , P l a n n i n g Stages were n o t d i s t i n c t , and t h e t o Q u e s t i o n 1 7 above p a r t l y Q u e s ti on 2 1

s u g g e s t i o n o f t h e Department t o t h e decision-maker, i.e., the Minister, who a p p r o v e d . What was l e a r n e d f r o m i t were t h e c o n c l u s i o n s made i n t h e report on the study and t h e recommendations f o l l o w i n g f r o m them. T h a t i s t o say t h a t the cost risk analysis lay a t the heart of the method used t o draw c o n c l u s i o n s . Other impacts were c o n s i d e r e d i n any d e t a i l . not

The f o l l o w i n g paper and were h e l p f u l :

books

Question 24
Haimes, Y . Y . , and Macko, D., "Hierarchical Structures i n Water Resources Systems Management,'' I E E E T r a n s a c t i o n s o n Systems, Man, and C y b e r n e t i c s , .. J u l y , 1973, pp. 396-402. Macko, D., and M e s a r o v i c , M.D., Takarrara, Y . , T h e o r y o f H i e r a r c h i c a l M u l t i l e v e l Systems, Academic Press, New Y o r k , 1970. B e l lman, R.E., and Dreyfus, S.E., A p p l i e d Dynamic Programming, P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1962. There were some small simplifications of t h e problem t o g i v e a s i m p l e r model. For i n s t a n c e , a c o u p l e o f r e s e r v o i r s were lumped and a pumping s t a t i o n was o m i t t e d . A l s o t h e d i v i s i o n i n t o subsystems i n v o l v e d some s i m p l i f i c a t i o n . The model was n o t " o p t i m i z e d " . The a l t e r n a t i v e s a v a i l a b l e d i d n o t seem t o b e many; t h e c h o i c e came down t o b r u t e f o r c e s i m u l a t i o n or dynamic programming w i t h d e c o m p o s i t i o n , and the l a t t e r was c h o s e n o n g r o u n d s o f economy i n c o m p u t i n g . The a p p r o a c h wou 1 d be used again. The d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e model t o o k many months.
I t so happened. t h a t i t was p o s s i b l e t o make i m m e d i a t e d e c i s i o n s without having t o consider the trade-off between c o s t and r i s k o r any o t h e r t r a d e - o f f . The immediate involving the dec i s i o n , configuration within the supply network o f water treatment plants to be and their capacities constructed w i t h i n t h e n e x t few y e a r s , was made o n a s i m p l e c o s t minimizing basis.

However, t h e s t u d y the major trade-off f u t u r e decision-making.

highlighted issues for

A multi-objective optimization methodology was not used; environmental issues d i d n o t a r i s e because alternatives had a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same i m p a c t s among those i n v o 1 ved in immediate dec i s i ons , and comprom i se among objectives has b e e n d e f e r r e d f o r l a t e r decisions. The i n v o l v e m e n t o f decision-makers (at the various l e v e l s ) i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s has b e e n g i v e n i n t h e answer t o Q u e s t i o n

15.
The conclusions and recommendations t h a t c a n be s h a r e d are that i n an a m i a b l e s o c i a l e n v i r o n m e n t d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g i s easy, and that sometimes difficult decision-making problems c a n be deferred

Question 22 A cost benefit analysis was n o t u n d e r t a k e n ; r a t h e r , r i s k a n a l y s i s was made. I more a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e and w o u l d b e u s e d a g a i n .

as such a cost t seemed circum-

Question 25
As i n d i c a t e d i n t h e answer to Question 24 above, no t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s was made, because i t was possible to defer i t .

Question 2 3
A r i s k analaysis 2 2 above) was
(See Q u e s t i o n made a t t h e

-135-

Question 26
The d e c i s i o n - m a k e r d i d accept t h e " o p t i m a l " s o l u a t i o n generated by model and d i d accect +he the a p p r o a c h w i t h o u t s u p p l e m e n t a t i o n by i n f ormat ion", b u t t h e " c o n v e n t i ona 1 procedures used a l r e a d y by o p e r a t o r s with a "feel" for t h e s y s t e m were consistent with the results of t h i s study.

done b y t h e P l a n n i n g S e c t i o n o f the Water Resources Branch. The approved recommendation f r o m the P1anni ng Section gave a c o n f i a u r a t i n n f o r a s v s t e m w i t h new components (in t h i s case water treatment plants) and specified capacities. T h i s was g i v e n t o t h e Design Branch and created no dificulties.

Acknowledgement Question 27
The f i n a l p l a n was s e n t i n t h e form o f a recommendation t o t h e i t t o the Minister, who r e f e r r e d Resources South A u s t r a l i a n Water Council f o r advice. This Council i s made up of t h e heads o f the D e p a r t m e n t and other government agencies and representatives of major p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups. It, in i t s advice t o the M i n i s t e r , agreed w i t h the recommendation. T h i s was then agreed t o by t h e Government o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a . Thanks a r e due t o M r . K.J. Shepherd of t h e E n g i n e e r i n g and Water Supply Department, South A u s t r a l i , f o r many c l a r i f i c a t i o n s . Any o b s c u r i t i e s and m i s t a k e s a r e t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the author.

References and Bibiliography

Allen, C.M., and K i l l i c k , J.C., I ' Au t oc r ac y or Democracy? Public Involvement in Water Resources P l a n n i n g , " Hydrology and Water R e s o u r c e s .Symposium, 1979, Perth, Institution of Engineers, A u s t r a l i a , Canberra, A.C.T., 1979, pp. 2 3 - 2 7 . Bellman, R.E., and D r e y f u s , S.E., Applied Dynamic Programming, P r i n c e t o n U n i v r s i t y P r e s s , 1962. Eng i n e e r i ng and Water SUPP 1 Y Department, South Australia, Metropolitan Adelaide Water Resource Study, A d e l a i d e , South Australia, June 1978 (2 v o l umes)

Question 28
For f u n d i n g t h e f i n a l plan, long-established p r o c e s s was used of arranging for State Government 1 oan funds with supplementation f r o m Commonwealth (federal) grants.

Question 2 9
A continuing evaluation is being c a r r i e d out. The p l a n n i n g undertaken in the study b e i n g d e s c r i b e d has n o t terminated, nor has c o n t i n u i n g e v a l u a t i o n c e a s e d . F o r i n s t a n c e , work i s now p r o c e e d i n g detailed on t h e development o f o p e r a t i n g procedures w i t h updated d a t a and m o d i f i e d m o d e l s .

Haimes, Y.Y., and Macko, D., " H i e r a r c h i c a l S t r u c t u r e i n Water R e s o u r c e s Systems Management," IEEE T r a n s a c t i o n s o n Systems, Man, and C y b e r n e t i c s , J u l y 1973, pp. 396-402. A.F., and Chong, P.S., Herath, "Secur i t y and Augmentation Decision C r i t e r i a i n a Complex Water Resources S y s tern, I' 1978 9 Hydrology Symposium, of Canberra Institution Engineers, Aust.ra1 i a , C a n b e r r a , A.C.T., 1978, pp. 109-113.

5. Planning Stage 5: Design

Project

Question 30
Wi'th t h e s t r u c t u r e t h a t the Eng i neer i ng and Water Supply Department t h e n had, t h e s t u d y was

-136-

Lindner, M.A., Samad, F.A., and D.T., "The Use o f Howel I , S y n t h e t i c Hydrology i n Decision Making in a Complex R i v e r Val l e y , " H y d r o l o g y and Water Resources Symposium, 1980, A d e l a i de, Institution of Engineers, A u s t r a l i a , Canberra, A.C.T., 1980, pp. 119-127. Manoel, P.J. and S c h o n f e l d t , C.B., "Economic Optimization o f an Expanding Water SUPP 1 Y , Hydrology Symposium, 1977 9 B r i sbane, Institution of Engineers, A u s t r a l i a , Canberra, A.C.T., 1977, p p . 88-92. Mesarovic, M.D., Macko, D., and Y., Theory of Takahara, H i e r a r c h i c a l M u l t i l e v e l Systems, Academic p r e s s , New Y o r k , 1970.

---L37-

-139-

POST EVALUATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS IN THE VISTULA RIVER BASIN, POLAND

Zdz is Iaw Kaczmarek Institute of Geophysicis of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Water Resources Division
Janusz KINDLER Institute of Environmental Engineering Warsaw Technical University, Warsaw, Poland

1.

Preface

The f o l l o w i n g p o s i t i o n s were h e l d by t h e co-authors a t t h e t i m e the V i s t u l a River Project ("Planning Comprehensive Development o f the V i s t u l a R i v e r System") was c o n d u c t e d (1968-1971) : Z d z i s l a w Kaczmarek: Professor and Director, Inst itute of Environmental Engineering, War saw Techn i c a 1 University; in charge of the inter-institutional team o f P o l i s h scientists and p r a c t i t i oners developing p r o j e c t methodology. Janusz K i n d l e r : A c t i n g D i r e c t o r , Bureau o f the Plan o f Operation "Vistula"; P r o j e c t to-Manager responsible for project m o b i l i z a t i o n and e x e c u t i o n j o i n t y w i t h t h e P r o j e c t Manager a p p o i n t e d b y t h e UNDP; l a t e r Chief P r o j e c t E n g i n e e r and member o f t h e team charged w i t h development o f project methodology.

1953-1956 Sciences i n t h e years (time horizon o f 1975). The p l a n was then twice revised i n the e a r l y 60s b y t h e N a t i o n a l Water A u t h o r i t y , and t h e t i m e h o r i z o n e x t e n d e d t o 1985. By 1968, i t became c l e a r t h a t t h e water s i t u a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the V i s t u l a R i v e r Basin which covers t h e c o u n t r y ' s area, a b o u t 54% o f required spec i a 1 attention. Preliminary long-term p r o j e c t i o n s d e v e l o p e d b y t h e P l a n n i ' n g Commission and t h e P o l i s h Academy o f Sciences indicated that the s t a t e o f water a v a i l a b i l i t y i n t h e b a s i n was not c o m p a t i b l e w i t h f u t u r e demands. In 1968, c o m p r e h e n s i v e s t u d i e s were i n i t i a t e d w i t h the assistance o f the U n i t e d N a t i o n s Development p r o g r a m and t h e U n i t e d N a t i o n s i t s e l f , u n d e r t h e name o f the "Vistula River Project" ("P 1 ann i ng Comprehens i v e Development o f the V i s t u l a River System")

2. Planning Stage 1: Project lnitation and Preliminary Planning

Question 7

The g o a l o f t h e p r o j e c t was to resources formu 1a t e a water development (investment) program c a p a b l e o f m e e t i n g demands p r o j e c t e d I t was t o t h e y e a r s 1985 and 2000. assumed t h a t t h e p r o j e c t w o u l d make u s e o f a l l p o s s i b l e improvements i n t h e m e t h o d o l o g y o f d e s i g n i n g and operating large-scale and complex w a t e r r e s o u r c e systems (application o f m a t h e m a t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s , computer simulation, and the 1 ike).

The f i r s t long-term n a t i o n a l w a t e r r e s o u r c e s d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n was d r a f t e d b y t h e P o l i s h Academy o f

-140-

C o n t i n u o u s r e v i s i o n and v e r i f i c a t i o n o f plans i s unavoidable i n a r a p i d l y e x p a n d i n g economy; t h e v a l u e o f an operational too1 for quick evaluation of t h e consequences to water management of some new development concepts and a l t e r n a t i v e s cannot be exaggerated.

Question 2
On the Pol i s h side, " H y d r o p r o j e k t " , a f i r m o f c o n s u l t i ng engineers operating within the framework o f the National Water was c h a r g e d w i t h t h e Author i t y , p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t and its c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h a b o u t 40 r e s e a r c h 14 institutes r e p r e s e n t i ng m i n i s t r i e s c o n c e r n e d and several universities. The d e v e l o p m e n t of p r o j e c t m e t h o d o l o g y was a s s i g n e d t o a s p e c i a l l y c r e a t e d team o f a b o u t 20 specialists representing university i n s t i t u t e s and v a r i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s of t h e N a t i o n a l Water Authority. From t h e UNDP s i d e , a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l panel o f e x p e r t s a s i s t e d t h e P o l i s h team t h r o u g h o u t t h e e n t i r e d u r a t i o n of the study. Assistance i n the development o f p r o j e c t methodology was e n t r u s t e d b y t h e UNDP t o Water I nc., Wa 1 n u t Resources Eng i n e e r s , Creek, C a l i f o r n i a , U . S . A . T h e r e was n o p u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t i n the project preparation. Project o b j e c t i v e s were f o r m u l a t e d by t h e N a t i o n a l Water A u t h o r i t y .

Three-Step Method i s composed o f t h r e e computer programs w h i c h a r e applied sequentially i n order to: (I) d e t e r m i n e a s e t of target releases f o r individual reservoirs i n t h e system, (2) d e v e l o p o p e r a t i n g rules for the reservoirs given the inflow h y d r o l o g y and t h e t a r g e t (3) determine the outflows, and optimal allocation of available uses c o n s i d e r e d water t o a l l water i n t h e model, giveri t h e o p e r a t i n g Steps (1) and (3) r u l e s from ( 2 ) . were based on t h e O u t - o f - K i l t e r Algorithm, which is a special-purpose l i n e a r programming method d e r i v e d f r o m n e t w o r k flow theory. S t e p (2) was based on t h e method developed by Kornatowski ( 1 9 6 9 ) , e m p l o y i n g s t o c h a s t i c dynamic of the programming. Detai I s Three-Step Method a r e d e s c r i b e d b y Kaczmarek e t a l . (1971). The programs w e r e made o p e r a t i o n a l on t h e P o l i s h - m a d e Odra 1204 and 1304 computers; however, they c o u l d n o t b e combined i n t o a s i n g l e p r o g r a m because o f the limited capacity of t h e machines a v a i l a b l e a t t h a t t i m e . Under the circumstances, implementation o f t h e method was r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t and a t t e n t i o n was f o c u s e d on t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e so-ca 1 1 ed Single-Step Met hod ( r e f e r r e d t o as t h e WRM M o d e l ) . u t i 1 izes the That m e t hod Out-of-Kilter Algorithm t o solve water r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n problems i n a complex m u l t i - r e s e r v o i r system (see K i n g e t a l . , 1971).

Question 3
See 1 above

3. Planning Stage 2: Data Collection and Processing Question 6

A starting point for a methodological studies was p r o p o s a l made by t h e Institute of Environmental Engineering, Warsaw Technical University, f o r a s p a t i a l and- p r o b l e m - o r i e n t e d decomposition o f t h e system. Such a d e c o m p o s i t i o n was j u s t i f i e d by t h e e x c e p t i o n a l s i z e o f t h e V i s t u l a R i v e r Basin, t h e large number of users, the c o m p l i c a t e d system s t r u c t u r e , and the limited computer facilities available a t that time. I t was d e c i d e d , t h e r e f o r e , t o decompose t h e

Question 4
The o n l y c o n s t r a i n t s imposed o n t h e s t u d y were t h o s e r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e Water Law, Water Q u a l i t y A c t , and o t h e r g o v e r n m e n t a l d e c r e e s and regulations in force i n Poland a t the time o f p r o j e c t preparation.

Question 5
The m e t h o d o l o g i c a l work was first organized around a b a s i c scheme p r o p o s e d b y t h e I n s t i t u t e o f Environmental E n g i n e e r i n g o f Warsaw Technical U n i v e r s i t y . The s o - c a l l e d

-141

b a s i n s p a t i a l l y i n t o 1 3 subsystems. Each o f these represents an a r e a whose economic structure i s as u n i f o r m as p o s s i b l e , w h i c h i s of homogeneous h y d r o l o g i c a l n a t u r e , and which creates similar hydraulic e n g i n e e r i n g problems. With regard t o problem-oriented decomposition, the proposal--in conformity with the special character o f water management in Poland--was d i r e c t e d mainly toward t h e problem o f water supply f o r the population, agriculture, and industry; toward water pollution toward independent c o n t r o l ; and investigation of t h e most r a t i o n a l solutions for flood control. The l i s t of water control objectives identified in the " V i s t u l a River Project'' included: Water supply to population, agriculture industry; the and

compilation, criticial evaluation, and p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e s e d a t a has been a s s i g n e d t o t h e N a t i o n a l Water Authority and it s agenc i e s , the espec i a 1 1 y "H yd r o p r oj ek t" p r e v i o u s l y mentioned.

15 For w a t e r supply studies, years o f historical mean m o n t h l y Di fferent flows were used. h y d r o l o g i c d a t a w e r e used f o r t h e water quality studies, flood c o n t r o l , and hydropower p r o d u c t i o n .
Question 7
O n l y e x i s t i n g d a t a were used after t h e i r i n t e n s i v e p r o c e s s i n g as t o m a t c h r e q u i r e m e n t s o f methods employed f o r p r o j e c t p r e p a r a t i o n .

Question 8a.

No.
Question 8b
No Maintenance of t h e minimum acceptable flows (established via a detailed study o f t h e environmental effects of various minimum flows) ; Water p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l ; Flood c o n t r o l ; Development o f facilities; recreational

Question 9
No

Question 70.
R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was u s e d of water for estimation requirements. N e t w o r k f l o w methods were used for transferring streamflow data from gauging stations t o supply/use balancing nodes.

Development o f hydropower product ion and i n l and n a v i g a t i on, t a k i ng into consideration the effectiveness of alternative power production and t r a n s p o r t modes. The t a r g e t v a l u e s o f a l l w a t e r control objectives have been established by the specialized agenc i es (14 ministries in collaboration) for two l e v e l s o f f u t u r e development, 1985 and 2000. The common base f o r a l l p r o j e c t i o n s has been t h e n a t i o n a l long-term Final development plan.

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

4.

Question I 7.
See P l a n n i n g S t a g e 1 .

Question 12.
Project execu t io n was authorized by the Governmental Decree s p e c i f y i n g a l l institutions involved and ob1 i g i n g them t o m o b i l i z e a p p r o p r i a t e manpower and f i n a n c i a l resources.

-142-

Question 73.
No p a r t i c i p a t i o n

Question 14.
. A l t o g e t h e r , 148 i n v e s t m e n t and were water use a 1 t e r n a t ives analyzed--46 f o r t h e t i m e h o r i z o n o f 1985 and 102 f o r t h e y e a r 2000. Alternatives were specified by "Hydroprojekt" w i t h the assistance o f t h e m i n i s t r i e s concerned.

Question 75.
Conflicts i n water u s e were a n a l y z e d by a s s i g n i n g w e i g h t s t o different uses reflecting their mutual priorities. The s y s t e m o f p r i o r i t y w e i g h t s was d e v e l o p e d b y t h e p r o j e c t team.

f o r m e r N a t i o n a l Water Authrority) which next presented a selected a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e government f o r f i na 1 aprova 1 In 1976, the government a p p r o v e d t h e p l a n and allocted t h e necessary funds f o r project implementation (detai led alloction for the nearest 5-year plan and directional allocation I n 1978, a u n t i 1 t h e y e a r 2000). new o r g n i z a t i o n was s e t up f o r p r o j e c t implementation. S i n c e 1980, p r o j e c t i m p l e m e n t a t o n has been k e p t reduced l e v e l at a significantly of t h e o v e r a l l economic because d i f f i c u l t i e s o f the country.

Question 20.
Yes,

i t was.

5.

Planning Stages 4 and 5

Question 76.
See Q u e s t i o n 4 above.

These s t a g e s d o n o t a p p l y to the level of planning i n the V i s t u l a River Basin.

Question 77.
a) The WRM Mode 1 ; simulation/optimization package f o r analysis of water resources allocation, including reservoirs operation. b) The POWDYN Model; dynamic programming f o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e optimal reservoir operating p o l i c i e s f o r hydropower p r o d u c t i o n . c) The POWREC Model; s i m u l a t i o n f o r computation o f t h e hydroenergy outputs. d) The m o d i f i e d SSARR f l o o d propagation analysis. A1 1 models were during the project. Model;

References
Kaczmarek, Z., K. Krajewski, T. Kornatowski, A . F i l i p k o w s k i , J. Kindler, and D.F. Kibler (1971). The M u l t i - S t e p Method f o r S i m u l a t i o n and O p t i m i z a t i o n of Vistula River Planning A l t e r n a t i v e s , i n Proceedings o f on the Warsaw Symposium Mathematical Mode 1 s in Hydro 1 ogy , International Association of Hydrological S c i e n c e s P u b l i c a t i o n No. 101, Unesco, P a r i s , pp. 1072-1077.

developed

Question 18.
A l l models were t e s t e d t h r o u g h application against detailed data i n t h e m o s t complex o f t h e r i v e r b a s i n subsystems.

J. Filimowski, and J. King, I.P., K i nd 1 e r (1971) The Out-of-Kilter A l g o r i t h m as a Single-Step Met hod for S i m u l a t i o n and O p t i m i z a t i o n o f Vi stula River P 1 a n n i ng i n Proceedings of Alternatives, the Warsaw Sympos i u m on Mathematical Mode 1 s in International Hydro 1 o g y , Association of Hydrological 101, Sciences P u b l i c a t i o n No. Unesco, P a r i s . pp. 1078- 1085.

Question 79.
" H y r o p r o j e k t " p r e s e n t e d a few "best" alternatives t o the Ministry o f A g r i c u l t u r e (which r e p l a c e d t h e

K o r n a t o w s k i , T. (1969). Basis of O p t i m a l Management o f a S i n g l e Storage R e s e r v o i r , Publication o f t h e Warsaw T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y .

-143-

DEVELOPMENT OF A WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT MODEL FOR THE SUSAA CATCHMENT IN DENMARK

Dan ROSBJERG Associate Professor Technical University of Denmark DK -2800 Lyngby, Denmark

1.

Introduction
i s very l i m i t e d and w i l l not be p e r m i t t e d i n t h e f u t u r e due t o l o w flow cond i t i o n s d u r i ng the i r r i g a t i o n season. Low f l o w a u g m e n t a t i o n b y means o f groundwater has n o t y e t b e e n a p p l i e d i n Denmark. The i n t e r e s t i n investigating this possibility of eliminating low f l o w c a l a m i t i e s i s , however, s t r o n g l y i n c r e a s i n g . There a r e g r e a t recreational and c o n s e r v a t i o n i n t e r e s t s a t t a c h e d t o the area. Especially the lake T y s t r u p and i t s s u r r o u n d i n g a r e a is a site of g r e a t concern. The streams w i t h i n the basin are in general also subject to public awareness i n terms o f both their q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y p r i m a r i l y f o r the purpose of ecology and recreation including fishing and canoe i ng

The S u s a a - P r o j e c t i s a 5 - y e a r hydrological research project initiated i n 1977 as t h e D a n i s h c o n t r i b u t ion to the I HP and c o m p l e t e d i n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f 1982. The Susaa catchment covers approximately 750 s q u a r e k i l o m e t e r s and i s s i t u a t e d i n t h e c e n t r a l and southern p a r t o f Zealand 5 0 - 7 0 km s o u t h - w e s t o f Copenhagen, see F i g . 1. The Susaa b a s i n i s u n d e r l a i n by aqu i f e r a regional a r t e s i an consisting of limestone deposits covered b y semipermeable g l a c i a l d e p o s i t s o f c l a y e y moraine. The water SUPP 1 Y of is m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and industries generally based on distributed low-intensive groundwater abstraction schemes. However, a centralized high-intensive groundwater abstraction for the benefit of Copenhagen i s located j u s t outside the north-eastern p a r t of t h e catchment. In addition Copenhagen u t i l i z e s t h e t w o l a k e s H a r a l d s t e d so and G y r s t i n g e s o as supplementary surface water reservoirs. The present groundwater a b s t r a c t i o n f o r i r r i g a t i o n purposes i s rather limited, but the i n t e r e s t f armers has increased. among E s p e c i a l l y t h e 1975-1977 d r o u g h t s gave r i s e t o a boom i n l i c e n c e applications. Irrigation based resources d i r e c t l y on s u r f a c e w a t e r

The Susaa a s we1 1 as its t r i b u t a r i e s a c t as r e c i p i e n t s f o r m u n i c i p a l sewage. The w a s t e - w a t e r treatment plants operate at different levels, b u t except f o r some minor plants with only mechanical treatment the plants provide at least biological treatment. The n o r t h e r n p a r t o f t h e Susaa c a t c h m e n t i s shown i n more d e t a i l i n Fig. 2. The management p a r t o f t h e ent ir e Susaa project is in particular the subject for the answering o f t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

-144-

ZEALAND

Fig. 2

ZeaZand and t h e l o c a t i o n of

t h e Susaa Catchment

-14 5-

U U

-146-

2. Planning Stage 1: Project Initiation and Preliminary Planning

Question 1
I n 1970 t h e t o t a l consumption o f w a t e r i n Z e a l a n d was e s t i m a t e d t o b e 35% o f t h e maximum amount w h i c h was c o n s i d e r e d p o s s i b l e t o w i t h d r a w without p a y i n g any a t t e n t i o n t o t h e environmental consequences. The 2000 was demand f o r the year f o r e c a s t e d t o be5O%. Thus, t a k i n g a l s o t h e impact on t h e environment i n t o account, s e r i o u s problems c o u l d be foreseen. the The l a r g e s t e x p a n s i o n o f w a t e r w i t h d r a w a l was p l a n n e d t o t a k e place within t h e Susaa b a s i n . The c i t i e s o f N a e s t v e d and e s p e c i a l l y Copenhagen were carrying out a series of preinvestigations, but the for the final deci s ion implementation of t h e expansion schemes was n o t t a k e n , one o f the reasons b e i n g t h e p u b l i c concern o f As p o s s i b l e e n v i r o n m e n t a l damages. a consequence o f the increasing environmental awareness, the Environmental A f f a i r s M i n i s t e r for a s k e d t h e D a n i s h N a t i o n a l Agency f o r Environmental P r o t e c t i o n and t h e three regional administrations of Z e a l a n d t o p l a n an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the ecological consequences o f an i n c r e a s i n g groundwater a b s t r a c t i o n i n Zealand. F o r t h e above m e n t i o n e d r e a s o n s i t was d e c i d e d t o p e r f o r m the investigations i n t h e Susaa basin. A t that t i m e t h e Danish Committee f o r H y d r o l o g y was f o r m e d as t h e c o m m i t t e e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i n t h e IHP. Danish p a r t i c i p a t i o n Because t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e IHP corresponded v e r y w e l l with the o b j e c t i ves of the current investigations, the comrn i t t e e selected the Susaa b a s i n as a research area. The m a i n o b j e c t i v e of the project was to study the hydrological and t o some e x t e n t t h e e c o l o g i c a l and economic consequences of increased water resources development: and to develop appropriate tools for water r e s o u r c e s management.

Seven research institutions p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e Susaa p r o j e c t . The s t u d y was f i n a n c e d by t h e D a n i s h National Agency o f Environmental P r o t e c t i o n , t h e Danish A g r i c u l t u r a l and V e t e r i n a r y R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l , t h e Danish Natural S c i e n c e Research Council, the Danish Technical Research Council and t h e D a n i s h N a t i o n a l Agency o f T e c h n o l o g y .

Question 2:
The Susaa r e s e a r c h programme was o u t l i n e d by a w o r k i n g g r o u p comprising r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f Danish i n s t i t u t i o n s dealing w i t h hydrology. The sub-project concerning management o f the water resources was p l a n n e d i n d e t a i l by the three 1) institutions taking p a r t herein: Institute of Hydrodynamics and Hydraulic Engineering, Technical U n i v e r s i t y o f Denmark, 2 ) t h e Water Q u a l i t y I n s t i t u t e , and 3) t h e D a n i s h Land Development Service. The D a n i s h Committee f o r H y d r o l o g y was responsible for the entire Susaa-project. The pub1 i c was n o t involved d i r e c t l y .

Question 3:
One o f t h e m a i n r e a s o n s f o r t h e successful a p p l i c a t i o n o f financial support t o t h e p r o j e c t was the appearance o f a new w a t e r resources development act which requested comprehensive water resources planning on the regional level taking into consideration: the resources. quantity of the water

2 the public, industrial and a g r i c u l t u r a l needs, f o r a s u f f i c i e n t water supply, both quantitatively and q u a l i t a t i v e l y .
J( envi ronmental protection (protection/conservation o f the the environmental and recreational va 1 ues)

5; o t h e r p u b l i c among those the materials.

considerations, raw use of

-147-

Thus the planning should r e c o g n i z e and s o l v e t h e c o n f l i c t s between t h e different interests representing water supply, waste water disposal, irrigation, r e c r e a t i o n and c o n s e r v a t i o n o f w e t areas. I t was commonly a g r e e d hat t h i s w o u l d r e q u i r e more i n s i g h t n t o processes and the h y d r o 1 og i c a 1 development of more a p p r o p r a t e planning tools.

3. Planning Stage 2: Data Collection and Processing

Questions 6 and 7:
H y d r o l o g i c and w a t e r quality d a t a were used t o c a l i b r a t e t h e the t o t a l simulation submodels of model. The f o l l o w i n g i s not a complete d e s c r i p t i o n , but only a l i s t i n g , w i t h t h e p u r p o s e t o g i v e an idea of the types and the proportions of the applied data, which partly comprised already existing data and p a r t l y data c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g t h e p r o j e c t phase. For t h e h y d r o l o g i c a l submodels s e r i e s o f p r e c i p i t a t i o n , streamflow, potential evapotranspiration, and temperature d a t a taken on a d a i l y b a s i s from s e v e r a l s t a t i o n s i n t h e basin were used. Fur therrnor e, groundwater l e v e l o b s e r v a t i o n s , l o n g term as w e l l as s h o r t t e r m in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h pumping t e s t s , w e r e a p p l i ed. Registrations of groundwater abstractions and discharges o f waste water treatment p l a n t s were a l s o t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t . Water q u a l i t y streamflow data were collected during intensive 2-day measurement p e r i o d s , where primarily t h e d i s c h a r g e and t h e v a r i a t i on in the oxygen concentration were observed. Further data f o r c a l i b r a t i o n o f the s t r e a m f l o w q u a l i t y model were used for example t h e load o f o r g a n i c matter originating from d i f f u s e . the sources, p l u s t h e geornetrics o f considered streams. The water qual i t y of lake models was cal ibrated on the bas i s of measurements o f d a t a showing the primary production, concentration of total nitrogen, t o t a l phosphorous, oxygen, c h l o r o p h y l l , e t c . intentions o f the One of t h e p r o j e c t was t o a n a l y s e examples o f future dispositions for t h e water r e s o u r c e on a b a s i s as r e a l i s t i c as possible. Therefore a large e f f o r t was made t o c o l l e c t precise data with regard to ex i s t i ng dispositions, forecasts of the f u t u r e demands and t h e d i s p o s i t i o n p l a n s a l r e a d y worked out. These

Question 4:
The c o n s t r a i n t s were p r i m a r i l y of a financial character. After n e g o t i a t i o n s g i v i n g r i s e t o some reductions i n t h e proposal for t h e r e s e a r c h programme, t h e p r o j e c t was accepted by the financial i n s t i t u t i o n s m e n t i o n e d i n t h e answer t o q u e s t i o n 1.

Question 5:
Because a1 1 the research i n the institutions participating p r o j e c t as w e l l as t h e f i n a n c i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s were s t r o n g l y involved i n t h e p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g phase, t h e f i n a l r e s e a r c h programme became f u l l y accepted. The comprised: entire Susaa project

Field studies processes.

of

hydrologic

Mathematical m o d e l l i n g of h y d r o l o g i c p r o c e s s e s and s y s t e m s . Management resources. The g e n e r a l purpose o f the management p a r t o f t h e Susaa p r o j e c t was t o d e v e l o p m a t h e m a t i c a l models suitable for water resources planning purposes. The v a r i o u s p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r model f o r m u l a t i o n was e v a l u a t e d i n the preliminary p l a n n i n g phase, and a combined model which was a b l e t o s i m u l a t e t h e j o i n t e f f e c t s o f water a b s t r a c t i o n and sewage disposal in the Susaa c a t c h m e n t was f o u n d most c o n v e n i e n t for detailed studies of the consequences o f various planning schemes. of water

-148-

p l a n s c o m p r i s e t h e development of waterworks for local supply i n the Susaa c a t c h m e n t and t h e s o - c a l l e d paragraph 21 p l a n s f o r the f u t u r e waste water treatment w i t h i n the b a s i n ( r e f e r r i n g t o paragraph 21 in t h e Danish environmental p r o t e c t i o n act)

model w a s o u t s i d e t h e scope o f the project. The p r e l i m i n a r y p r o j e c t phase c o v e r e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 6 months i n which t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n a n a l y s i s and f i n a l p r o j e c t s p e c i f i c a t i o n was worked out by a study group comprising representatives from the three participating institutions.

Finally, econom i c data c o n c e r n i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s and o p e r a t i o n c o s t s o f w a t e r w o r k s and waste water t r e a t m e n t p l a n t s were collected. H e r e b y t h e consequences o f various water r e s o u r c e s schemes c a n be compared a l s o i n economic terms.

Question 12.
D u r i n g t h e p r o j e c t p e r i o d some of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g institutions supported t h e p r o j e c t by a l l o c a t i n g more r e s e a r c h manpower t h a n g r a n t e d b y t h e f i n a n c i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s and by providing rooms and s e c r e t a r i a l assistance f r e e o f charge f o r the project.

Question 8:
No OR t e c h n i q u e was u s e d i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and processing.

Question 13:
The p u b l i c d i d n o t p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e research p l a n n i n g process.

Question 9: Question 14:

A d a t a b a n k was e s t a b l i s h e d f o r a l l d a t a c o l l e c t e d as p a r t o f t h e hydrological investigations i n the Susaa area. T h i s promoted t h e exchange of data between the s u b p r o j e c t s and e n s u r e d t h e s t o r a g e o f data i n an o p e r a t i o n a l f o r m . The o b j e c t i v e o f the p r o j e c t was t o develop a t o o l s u i t a b l e for investigating alternative dispositions for t h e use o f the water resource, t a k i n g i n t o account conflicting interests such as: abstraction for l o c a l and e x t e r n a l p u b l i c water supply, i r r i g a t i o n of farmland, recreational use of s t r e a m s and lakes, use of the s t r e a m s as r e c i p i e n t s for treated waste water.

Question 10:
See t h e answers t o Q u e s t i o n s and

7.

4. Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

Question 75:
I n the p r e l iminary project i t was r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e phase, choice o f a s i m u l a t i o n model t y p e imp1 i e d some shortcomings. Trade-offs could not be e x p l i c i t l y d e t e r m i n e d and t h e model was n o t able t o f i n d the "optimal" scheme for a c e r t a i n c h o i c e o f l o c a l and demands, irrigation e x t e r na 1 p e r m i s s i o n s , minimum d i s c h a r g e s a t v a r i o u s s t a t i o n s and s e l e c t e d w a t e r q u a l i t y standards e t c . However, t h e possibilities for obtaining detailed information of the hydrological, the water q u a l i t y , and t h e economic consequences of s e l e c t e d schemes were f o u n d more i m p o r t a n t .

Question 11:
I n t h e management p a r t o f the i t was i n i t i a l l y a g r e e d Sua-project t h a t t h e m a i n a c t i v i t y s h o u l d be t o d e v e l o p an o v e r a l l s i m u l a t i o n model w h i c h was a b l e t o c a l c u l a t e t h e of water integrated effects a b s t r a c t i o n and w a s t e w a t e r d i s p o s a l i n t h e catchment, by combining a series of q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y sub-models. In the preliminary phase o f the p r o j e c t period the possibilities of aPP1 Y i ng o p t i m i z a t i o n m o d e l s w e r e examined i n d e t a i l , b u t t h e c o n c l u s i o n was that d e v e l o p i n g an o v e r a l l o p t i m i z a t i o n

-149-

In the analysis of the possibilities of developing an i t '&as overall o p t i m i z a t i o n model r e a l i z e d t h a t o n l y a model w i t h a hierarchical structure c o u l d be u s e d . T h i s s t r u c t u r e was o u t l i n e d , b u t n o t worked o u t i n f u l l d e t a i l .

Question 76:
No f u r t h e r constraints imposed i n t h e p l a n n i n g phase.

were

Question 77:
The d e v e l o p e d s i m u l a t i o n model consists of a series of hydrological and w a t e r q u a l i t y submodels w h i c h aim t o p r o v i d e a u n i f i e d b a s i s f o r water r e s o u r c e s management. The sub-models c a n b e d i v i d e d into a hydrological and a w a t e r quality model complex, supplemented w i t h programs t h a t c a l c u l a t e t h e economic consequences o f t h e chosen r e g i o n a l w a t e r r e s o u r c e s scheme. The m a i n h y d r o l o g i c a l submodel i s an i n t e g r a t e d s u r f a c e / s u b s u r f a c e catchment m o d e l , which a l l o w s f o r simulation of s o i l moisture i n the r o o t zone, evaporation, flow in tile-drains, s t r e a m f l o w and seepage t o and f l o w t h r o u g h a q u i f e r s . This model i s e x t e n d e d w i t h models f o r irrigation, for management of s u r f a c e r e s e r v o i r s and f o r l o w - f l o w augmentation. The model t h u s takes i n t o consideration the conjunctive use o f surface and groundwater resources with the intention of providing water f o r supply, while m a i n t a i n i n g adequate streamflows. The w a t e r q u a l i t y model complex u t i l i z e s i n p u t s c o n c e r n i n g he w a s t e ( ocation, water t r e a t m e n t scheme c a p a c i t y and r e m o v a l e f f i c ency o f the treatment f a c i l i t es and by-passing c o n f i g u r a t i o n s ) together with information about c r i t i c a l s t r e a m f l o w s and p o s s i b l e low-flow augmentations simulated by the h y d r o l o g i c model complex. This allows for s i m u l a t i o n o f the water quality i n streams. Furthermore, t h e w a t e r q u a l i t y complex c a l c u l a t e s t h e l o a d o f n u t r i e n t s on two o f the lakes i n t h e basin, by means o f w h i c h t h e w a t e r q u a l i t y h e r e i n can be determined.

For given water resources dispositions the tota mode 1 o p e r a t e s as s t a n d a r d d u r n g a t i m e 31 years, utilizing period of m e t e o r o l o g i c a l d a t a f r o m he p e r i o d 1950-1980 on a d a i l y b a s i s a s i n p u t . T h i s a l l o w s t h e consequences t o b e evaluated on the basis o f the c l i m a t i c v a r i a t i o n s t o be expected in the future. Thereby a also of the statistical assessment consequences, as we1 1 as a p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e consequences as functions of time (for example c a n be d u r i n g a drought period) chosen. The c o u p l i n g o f t h e model complexes i s shown i n F i g . 3. As s t a n d a r d t h e model s i m u l a t e s t h e h y d r a u l i c head o f the primary groundwater in 112 locations, c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e p o l y g o n s shown i n Fig. 4, t h e s t r e a m f l o w i n 45 stations and the water level v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e l a k e s on a d a i l y basis. The w a t e r q u a l i t y i n t h e lakes i s c a l c u l a t e d as t h e y e a r l y p r i m a r y production, while the q u a l i t y i n the s t r e a m s i s g i v e n as t h e v a r i a t i o n o f t h e oxygen c o n c e n t r a t i o n d u r i n g a c r i t i c a l streamflow s i t u a t i o n i n the above m e n t i o n e d 45 s t a t i o n s . Add t o t h i s a series of for sing1 ing out possibi 1 i t i e s special information, for example regarding irrigation, v a r i a t i o n of the i r r i g a t i o n demand, i n c r e a s e o f the evapotranspiration and the percolation, etc.

Question 18:
The d i f f e r e n t sub-models were tested, c a l i b r a t e d and v e r i f i e d i n connection w i t h various sub-projects w i t h i n t h e e n t i r e Susaa p r o j e c t . To some e x t e n t t h e y w e r e m o d i f i e d when introduced i n t o the t o t a l simulation model.

Question 79:
The s e l e c t i o n o f a f i n a l plan f o r water r e s o u r c e s development i n t h e a r e a was o u t s i d e t h e scope o f t h e r e s e a r c h programme.

-150-

0,
A W

1
' c . \

z
ul w
Y U
-1

P,

>

w z o w
1

I U
3

I - -

a
W

I -

--

-151-

-P

0)

-152-

Question 20.
The project was i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y o n l y i n t h e sense that both the quantity and t h e quality effects of p o t e n t i a l water r e s o u r c e s development schgmes were h a n d l e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y by t h e m o d e l , c o n t r a r y t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l approach w i t h more o r less uncoordinated planning o f water a b s t r a c t i o n and sewage d i s p o s a l , e t c .

t h e model f o r p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e . It was t h e hope t h a t t h i s illustrative u s e o f t h e model w o u l d e n c o u r a g e t h e water a u t h o r i t i e s concerned w i t h the Susaa c a t c h m e n t to implement the model in the future planning process, as w e l l as o t h e r w a t e r authorities, to develop s i m i l a r models. The r e p o r t e d examples o f s i m u l a t i o n (see 1) c o m p r i s e :
9~ Increase o f surface w i t h d r a w a l f o r e x t e r n a l use.

model

5. Planning Stage 4: Development of Final Project Specifications

water

Question 27: OR methods w e r e n o t u s e d i n t h e i t i s possible project. However, w i t h o u t any d i f f i c u l t i e s t o e x t e n d t h e model b y a s u b - o p t i m i z a t i o n o f the waste water treatment facilities. With given quality standards f o r t h e s t r e a m and f i x e d capacities of the plants the t r e a t m e n t l e v e l s can be a l l o c a t e d i n order t o obtain minimum annual c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n c o s t s . Question 22:
No c o s t b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s made as p a r t o f t h e p r o j e c t . was

9~ C o n j u n c t i v e a b s t r a c t i o n of g r o u n d w a t e r and s u r f a c e w a t e r for e x p o r t purposes. 9~ Groundwater irrigation.

abstraction

for

Low f l o w a u g m e n t a t i o n .
Jt A1ternative t r e a t m e n t schemes.

waste

water

Essential for selection of model s i m u l a t i o n examples was t h e fact that the c i t y of Copenhagen p r e v i o u s l y had shown g r e a t i n t e r e s t i n t h e groundwater r e s o u r c e s o f the basin, thereby competing w i t h l o c a l demand f o r w a t e r s u p p l y , recreation and i r r i g a t i o n .

Question 23: Questions 24 and 25:

No s p e c i f i c r i s k a n a l y s i s was performed, but i m p a c t a n a l y s i s was performed t o a l a r g e e x t e n t as a substantial p a r t o f the project.
The p r a c t i c a l use of the i s shown i n F i g . s i m u l a t i o n model 5. The d i s p o s i t i o n s o f t h e w a t e r resource to be analysed are s p e c i f i e d by t h e user as input t o t h e model. Depending on t h e needs for detailed information of the consequences, t h e user s p e c i f i e s t o what e x t e n t t h e simu a t e d r e s u l t s s h o u l d appear as o u PU t f rom t h e model r u n n i n g . The consequences o f specific p l a n s f o r use o f t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s c a n be a s s e s s e d in detail by the A specific simulation model. t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s was n o t included i n the p r o j e c t . However, i t i s by means o f t h e model p o s s i b l e t o s t u d y the environmental and economic consequences o f v a r i o u s a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r water r e s o u r c e s development in the Susaa catchment, and to determine a p p r o p r i a t e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s o f w a t e r w o r k s and sewage t r e a t m e n t plants.

Question 26:
A s e r i e s o f poss b l e p l ann i ng d i s p o s i t i o n s w e r e ana y s e d i n o r d e r t o exemplify t h e app i cab l i t y o f
No decision-makers were involved i n the research p r o j e c t .

-153-

>
I W
A

0
W

v)

U )

0 3 0
E
W
v)

U =

d o a z

a 0

I -

z
0 0
W O

r o o w zv) o z

2 3

3
0

-2 0
E

n
W

n
v)

v)

-154-

Questions 2 7 and 28:

No f i n a l p l a n was p a r t of the project. approved as

Question 29:
The p r o j e c t g r o u p made on t h e D a n i s h Committee o f request of Hydrology a proposal for a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of system a n a l y s i s models f o r w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g purposes. The Susaa p r o j e c t formed an e s s e n t i a l b a s i s f o r t h e p r o p o s a l , w h i c h has n o t y e t been g r a n t e d . t h e Susaa A f t e r completion of project the water resources management group was asked t o perform a. comprehensive d o c u m e n t a t i o n and u p d a t i n g o f t h e model i n o r d e r t o make i t p o s s i b l e for t h e r e g i o n a l water a u t h o r i t i e s t o r u n t h e model. Unfortunately t h i s p r o j e c t was c o n f i n e d t o t h e

h y d r o l o g i c a l model complex, so now t h e more o p e r a t i o n a l v e r s i o n o f the model does n o t i n c l u d e w a t e r q u a l i t y and economic a s p e c t s . This project was f i n a n c e d by t h e D a n i s h N a t i o n a l of Environment P r o t e c t i o n Agency together w i t h the three regional w a t e r a u t h o r i t i e s o f Zealand.

6 . Planning Stage 5 Design Question 30:

Project

No d e s i g n was p e r f o r m e d as p a r t o f the p r o j e c t .

Reference
(1) Knudsen J., and D. Rosbjerg (1982) Water resources p l a n n i n g i n t h e Susaa b a s i n b y means of a s i m u l a t i o n model. Nordic 13, pp. 323-338. Hydrology, Vol.

-155-

MANAGEMENT OF ISRAEL'S WATER RESOURCES

Uri SHAMIR Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, 32000, Israel.

1.

Introduction

I n t h i s c a s e s t u d y we c o n s i d e r t h e u s e o f t h e systems a p p r o a c h f o r p l a n n i n g and management o f Israel's water resources. I t i s somewhat d i f f e r e n t f r o m o t h e r case s t u d i e s i n t h i s volume, because i t spans many years o f activity, covering a continuous process o f plannings, i n a water resources p r o j e c t which c o v e r s an e n t i r e c o u n t r y , a l b e i t o n e whose s i z e may n o t be much l a r g e r t h a n some o f t h e r e g i o n s c o v e r e d b y o t h e r case s t u d i e s . A v e r y s u b s t a n t i a l amount o f water r e s o u r c e s systems a n a l y s i s work has been c a r r i e d o u t i n Israel s i n c e t h e e a r l y 1 9 6 0 ' ~ ,s p a n n i n g t h e entire spectrum from l o n g range p l a n n i n g f o r t h e e n t i r e c o u n t r y down t o real-time operation o f local systems. A r e v i e w t o 1980 was Herein pub1 i s h e d b y Shamir (1980). we s h a l l answer the questionnaire w i t h s p e c i f i c reference to the " P r o j e c t P 1 ann i ng" p a r t o f o u r work Still, this r e f e r s n o t t o one particular study but t o planning work f o r t h e n a t i o n a l system and i t s r e g i o n a l components, work w h i c h has been done i n many inter-related s t u d i e s over t h e years.

for Israel, Ltd. i s the national Co. Ltd. planner. M e k o r o t Water is t h e n a t i o n a l water supplier. Development, a d a p t a t i o n and use o f systems a n a l y s i s m e t h o d o l o g i e s and m o d e l s have been c a r r i e d o u t b y these bodies, i n close cooperation with universities. The s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s work has been s t r u c t u r e d as a h i e r a r c h y ( f o r d e t a i 1 s see S h a m i r , 1980) : at the top are models of long range p l a n n i n g f o r t h e e n t i r e c o u n t r y , and as one p r o g r e s s e s down t h e h i e r a r c h y o f models t h e temporal and s p a t i a l detail increases. Some r e f e r e n c e s a r e c i t e d a t t h e end o f th.is case s,tudy. T h i s i s b u t a sample, s i n c e an e x t e n s i v e l i s t w o u l d b e t o o l o n g . A l s o , much o f t h e w o r k , even when new methodologies were being d e v e l o p e d and t e s t e d , i s described only i n project reports, most o f them i n Hebrew. Next we give a b r ie f description of Israel's water r e s o u r c e s and needs, and then p r o c e e d t o answer t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . I s r a e l ( F i g u r e 1) i s l o c a t e d i n a s e m i - a r i d a r e a , where mean a n n u a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n averages 25-50 mm i n t h e s o u t h , 500-600 mm i n t h e c e n t r a l r e g i o n s , and r e a c h e s 7 0 0 - l l O O mm i n the north. About 80% o f t h e t o t a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n occurs i n the northern h a l f o f t h e country, almost e n t i r e l y b e t w e e n O c t o b e r and March. The country's area i s a b o u t 20,000

I s r a e l ' s water resources a r e managed b y t h e Water Commissioner. The Hydrologic Serv i c e I S r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and analysis, and a d v i s e s t h e Water Commissioner. Tahal-Water Planning

-156-

-157-

square kilometers, and the population i s j u s t over 4 m i l l i o n . The proven natural water resources of Israel amount to approximately 1850x10 m3/year: a b o u t 60% i s f r o m g r o u n d w a t e r , 30% i s f r o m Lake K i n n e r e t ( t h e Sea o f G a l i l l e e ) , and t h e r e m a i n d e r i s f r o m other s u r f a c e sources. Two t h i r d s o f t h e g r o u n d w a t e r comes from two main a q u i f e r s : the coastal aquifers (a 5-30 km strip along the M e d i t e r r a n e a n c o a s t ) , and t h e d e e p e r limestone aquifer to its east. These m a i n s o u r c e s a r e shown on Figure 1, together w i t h the National Water C a r r i e r . Completed i n 1964, t h e N a t i o n a l C a r r i e r i s t h e backbone o f I s r a e l ' s w a t e r s u p p l y system. I t t a k e s a b o u t 400x10 rn3/year f r o m Lake K inneret, and through connection t o a b o u t 25 r e g i o n a l systems s u p p l i e s and r e c e i v e s w a t e r along i t s route. Host o f t h e water p o t e n t i a l is already developed, and i n c e r t a i n cases--notably the coas t a 1 aquifer--is over-exploited. The supply t o t a l amount a v a i l a b l e fqr depends o n t h e p o l i c y f o r e x t r a c t i o n from t h e s o u r c e s : should i t be balanced, i .e. n o t exceed t h e natural potential, or w i l l over-draft be allowed f o r some p e r i o d o f time. I f over-draft is allowed, t h i s must e v e n t u a l l y l e a d t o a reduction of supplies, unless water c a n be p r o d u c e d e c o n o m i c a l l y from t h e r e m a i n i n g s o u r c e s a n d / o r b y desalination. Use of reclaimed sewage f o r irrigation of certain c r o p s i s i n c r e a s i n g , and i s e x p e c t e d t o r e a c h 250-300x10 m3/year. Demand present 1y totals 1850x10 mg/year: 69% in agriculture, 22% urban and 9% industrial. 75x10 m3/year are allowed t o f l o w f r o m the coastal aquifer t o t h e sea t o p r o v i d e some f l u s h i n g o f c o n t a m i n a n t s and c o n t a i n t h e sea w a t e r intrusion. This brings total present use to 1925x10 mg/year, more t h a n t h e average annual potential of the p r e s e n t l y developed sources. U n t i l t h e l a t e 1960's t h e main objective of I s r a e l ' s water s e c t o r

was d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e s o u r c e s and o f t h e c o n v e y a n c e and d i s t r i b u t i o n systems, t o b r i n g water to all consumers. The water systems d e v e l o p e d o v e r t h e f i r s t two decades of the S t a t e ' s existence from a scattered c o l l e c t i o n of outdated l o c a l s y s t e m s , each based on i t s own local sources, t o an integrated national system. Once t h e m a i n systems w e r e i n p l a c e , and demands reached and then exceeded t h e resource p o t e n t i a l , the water sector has t o d e a l w i t h s c a r c i t y o f w a t e r and c o m p e t i t i o n among t h e consumers. The m a i n i s s u e s and p r o b l e m s now are: (1) C o m p l e t i n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e remaining sources, which a r e p r o b l e m a t i c , remote, expensive, of low q u a l i t y . These i n c l u d e some s u r f a c e and g r o u n d w a t e r , r e c l a i m e d sewage and p o s s i b l y d e s a l i n a t i o n . (2) The p r e s s u r e t o increase supplies, o n t h e one hand, and t h e responsibility to preserve the q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y o f w a t e r i n t h e sources, on t h e o t h e r , must be resolved somehow i n a balanced pol icy. (3) O p e r a t i o n o f the National Water Carrier and t h e r e g i o n a l systems, which connect t h e main r e s e r v o i r s and convey w a t e r o v e r w t h the considerable distances, a t t e n d a n t problems o f re1 abi 1 i t y and h i g h e n e r g y c o s t s .

(4) A n o t i c e a b l e d e t e r o r a t i o n of water quality i n some o f t h e sources, p r i m a r i l y i n t h e coas t a 1 aqu i f e r .

which (5) Limited budgets, severely constrain investments in new projects and m a i n t e n a n c e o f e x i s t i n g ones.

2. Planning Stage 1: Project Initiation and Preliminary Planning

Question I :
Long r a n g e p l a n n i n g is an integral component o f t h e systems a n a l y s i s work i t s e l f . The models a t t h i s level consider e x p l i c i t l y on the supply side the stochastic

-158-

nature of the available water resources, and o n t h e demand s i d e The e x p e c t e d i n c r e a s e s i n domestic demands and t h e p r o d u c t i v e u s e s o f w a t e r i n a g r i c u l t u r e and industry. The r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s a t t h i s l e v e l p r o v i d e t h e framework f o r all of t h e more d e t a i l e d r e g i o n a l and p r o j e c t l e v e l plans. is The answer t o Question 1 t h e r e f o r e t h a t when a p a r t i c u l a r project is planned t h e r e is a it l o n g - t e r m programme i n t o which must f i t . A t t h e same t i m e , t h i s long-term programme I S not completely fixed, and actually evolves and changes as r e g i o n a l plans are studied.

primary c r i t e r i a f o r evaluation of specific plans are: meeting demands, preservation of water q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y i n t h e s o u r c e s f o r f u t u r e generations, economics, environmental q u a l i t y .

Question 4:
The s e v e r e s t c o n s t r a i n t s are: the l i m i t e d water resource, budget, t h e need t o s u p p l y w a t e r according t o the national settlement plan, the ( p o l i t i c a l ) d i f f i c u l t y t o reduce t h e water a l l o c a t i o n t o a g r i c u l t u r e ( i n o r d e r t o b a l a n c e t h e demand w i t h t h e l i m i t e d supply, as t h e domestic demands g r o w ) . These c o n s r r a i n t s , a l l o f them, have been and s t i l l a r e t h e s u b j e c t o f d e b a t e s and c o n t r o v e r s i e s . Even t h e f i r s t , w h i c h seems t o depend on n a t u r a l and ' o b j e c t i v e ' phenomena, i s s u b j e c t t o d i s c u s s i o n because one can a l l o w o v e r e x p l o i t a t i o n o f the aquifers for some t i m e a t t h e ' e x p e n s e ' o f f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s , and therefor e the total resource constraint i s actually a policy variable. The o t h e r c o n s t r a i n t s a r e o b v i o u s l y p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s , and a r e t h e r e f o r e open t o a g r e a t d e a l o f d i s c u s s i o n , evqn i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a p a r t i c u l a r r e g i o n a l s t u d y and n o t only a t the national level.

Question 2:
For t h e l a s t 20 y e a r s t h e r e have a l w a y s been s e v e r a l teams o f systems a n a l y s t s w o r k i n g o n v a r i o u s components of the studies. The t o t a l number o f s k i l l e d personnel has r a n g e d b e t w e e n a b o u t 10 and 3 0 , i n 4-5 g r o u p s a t u n i v e r s i t i e s and operational agencies. The p e o p l e ' s expertise are: water resources engineering, mathemaics, s t a t i s t i c s , computer s c i e n c e s . Most h o l d M a s t e r s and D o c t o r a t e d e g r e e s . The 'pub1 i c ' is always represented in Israel in the decision-making process, by v i r t u e of the f a c t that representatives o f several constituencies - notably the the f a r m e r s - s e r v e o n some o f governing bodies.

Question 5:
I t i s v e r y h a r d t o answer this question i n the c o n t e x t o f our mu1 t i -year mu1 t i - p r o j e c t case. Methods o f a n a l y s i s w e r e d e v e l o p e d , a d a p t e d and a p p l i e d i n v a r i o u s p a r t s of the work. A t t i m e s t h e r e was c o n s i d e r a b l e d i s a g r e e m e n t on w h i c h method(s) t o use, b u t t h i s had i n general a p o s i t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n to the ultimate outcome of the A t other times i t was analysis. q u i t e o b v i o u s w h i c h method w o u l d be best

Question 3
A t the highest levels o f the systems analysis hierarchy the objectives a r e r a t h e r g e n e r a l , and a r e e x p r e s e d as ' t o s u p p l y a l l the water needed for the country's development and w e l f a r e f o r all t i m e s t o come.' As one moves down t h e h i e r a r c h y t h e c r i t e r i a become more specific, and conflicting objectives appear. Generally, domestic s u p p l y has t h e h i g h e s t p r i o r i t y , and t h e r e m a i n d e r i s g i v e n t o a g r i c u l t u r e and industry. The

P r a c t i c a l l y a l l of t h e known approaches and s y s tems ana 1 y s i s t e c h n i q u e s have been used, i n one case o r a n o t h e r .

-159-

3. Planning Stage 2: Data Collection and Processing

Question 7:
Data i s c o n s t a n t l y collected, analyzed and assembled by the Hydrologic Service, Tahal and Mekorot on: hydrology of surface and ground waters, actua 1 consumptions, expected demands, irrigation. costs, b e n e f i t s from Still, for each p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n some a d d i t i o n a l d a t a a s s e m b l y and I S performed. anal ys i s data Occasionally, synthet ic g e n e r a t i o n i s a l s o used.

Question 6
Many. d a t a b a s e s have been developed over t h e years, y e t i t i s recognized that considerable u n c e r t a i n t y always remains. Some o f the data collection, analysis, assembly and p u b l i c a t i o n deserve s p e c i a l mention. Hydrologic data o f s u r f a c e w a t e r ( f l o w s , q u a l i t i e s ) and of groundwater ( l e v e l s , e x t r a c t i o n , q u a l i t y ) a r e c o l l e c t e d r e g u l a r l y on an e x t e n s i v e s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l grid. These d a t a a r e p u b l i s h e d and made a v a i l a b l e t o a l l p l a n n e r s . An o f f i c i a l 'Water Resources P o t e n t i a l Book' i s u p d a t e d once e v e r y few is a years, and, once p u b l i s h e d , formal b i n d i n g document for all plans. While i t i s recognized t h a t t h i s document d o e s n o t c o n s t t u t e the u l t i m a t e f i n a l ' t r u t h ' , i t puts work by order i n a1 1 p l a n n i n g e s t a b l i s h i n g an o f f i c i a l g u i d e 1 ne. On the demand side the situation i s different. Exact data e x i s t o n p a s t and p r e s e n t demands ( m o n t h l y and a n n u a l q u a n t i t i e s f o r all consumers) since water is allocated, metered and c h a r g e d . Forecasts of f u t u r e demands, in particular for new s e t t l e m e n t s and t h e i n c r e a s e i n d o m e s t i c use, are open t o e s t i m a t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n by planners, even t h o u g h some b i n d i n g n a t i o n a l documents do e x i s t . A source o f uncertainty in planning i s the estimated budget t h a t w i l l be a v a i l a b l e t o t h e w a t e r sector i n general and to each project i n p a r t i c u l a r , i n t h e years t o come. I n r e c e n t years this u n c e r t a i n t y has been a c a u s e f o r in the considerable difficulty planning phase, more so, for example, t h a n any e x p e c t e d changes i n cost data, i n t e r e s t rates, e t c . A l s o n e t b e n e f i t from water used f o r i r r i g a t i o n i s an i m p o r t a n t p i e c e o f information for planning. Data e x i s t f r o m a number o f s o u r c e s , but there are considerable differences between v a l u e g i v e n by t h e v a r i o u s sources ( d e p e n d i n g on t h e i r v e s t e d i n t e r e s t i n t h i s m a t t e r ) so t h a t no f i r m data are available.

Question 8:
OR t e c h n i q u e s have been u s e d b y t h e H y d r o l o g i c S e r v i c e t o p l a n and operate the data collection networks, p r i m a r i l y of groundwater.

Question 9:
Assessment o f d a t a a v a i l a b i l i t y i s performed on a r e g u l a r b a s i s by the agencies in charge, and t h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s u s u a l l y no need t o deal w i t h t h i s m a t t e r e x p l i c i t l y i n the context of a particular planning study.

Question 70:
Data a n a l y s i s , u s i n g a v a r i e t y of statistical methods, i s c a r r i e d o u t on a r e g u l a r b a s i s by the H y d r o l o g i c S e r v i c e and T a h a l , f o r the surface and ground water hydrology data. 4. Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

Question 11:
A typical regional planning 1 and 2 study r e q u i r e s between man-years o f systems a n a l y s t s and supporting s t a f f . Additional costs are p r i m a r i l y f o r several hours o f computation time on a large computer.

Question 12:
Not r e evant, s i n c e t h e s t u d i e s a r e c a r r i e d o u t by t h e institutions themselves.

-160-

Question 13:
No p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e normal sense, e x c e p t t h a t m e n t i o n e d already i n Question 2.

projects an ad-hoc steering c o m m i t t e e i s u s u a l l y s e t up. I t is the f i r s t level o f plan evaluation, b u t i t s o u t p u t m u s t t h e n go t o t h e permanent c o m m i t t e e s , and u l t i m a t e l y t o t h e Water Commissioner h i m s e l f . Trade-offs are somet imes expressed e x p l i c i t l y ( i n t h e model i t s e l f o r i n the e v a l u a t i o n process) and sometimes i m p l i c i t l y . Conflict i s by d i s c u s s i o n s in resolution c o m m i t t e e s , u l t i m a t e l y b y t h e Water Commissioner himself, aided by r e s u l t s of the analysis.

Question 14:
The a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e u s u a l l y in a mathematical d e f i ned programming model by a s e t of constraints. T h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s an f eas i b 1 e infinite number of Still, the a1 t e r n a t i v e s . c o n s t r a i n t s determine t h e range o f feasible alternatives, and s e t t i n g t h e c o n t r a i n t s amounts t o s c r e e n i n g o u t some a l t e r n a t i v e s . The systems analysts formulate the constraints, and m u s t t h e r e f o r e be c a r e f u l n o t t o impose t h e i r own f i x e d i d e a s on t h e plan. I n a t y p i c a l model t h e r e i s a v e r y l a r g e number (hundreds, even several thousands) of constraints, and some a r e r a t h e r i n t r i c a t e . The c h a n c e t h a t anyone b u t t h e systems analysts themselves will detect misconceptions and/or e r r o r s i n t h e c o n s t r a i n t s i s v e r y low. T h i s puts a great responsibility on t h e must systems a n a l y s t s , and t h e y e x e r c i se a great deal of self-discipline and p e r s e v e r a n c e i n checking and r e - c h e c k i ng the cons t r a i n t s

Question 16
A f u l l answer t o t h i s q u e s t i o n w o u l d c o v e r much more space t h a n i s allowed here. W e shall try to answer i n general, f o r the various types of constraints normally present i n our p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s .
(a) H y d r o 1 ogy and ava i 1 ab 1 e water: These a r e r a t h e r w e l l f i x e d . Some s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s i s u s u a l l y performed, t o explore the e f f e c t o f u n c e r t a i n t y i n o u r knowledge o f the sources and of the stochastic hydrology. (b) Demands: Some a r e imposed by t h e n a t i o n a l development p l a n s f o r settlement. Forecasts o f urban demand g r o w t h a r e open t o d i s c u s s i o n and analysis by the planners. A g r i c u l t u r a l demands a l m o s t a l w a y s exceed a v a i l a b l e r e s o u r c e s , s o t h a t little difficulty exists in a s s e s s i ng them. (c) Economics: The b u d g e t a r y c o n s t r a i n t m u s t b e d e a l t w i t h by it parametric investigation, since i s u s u a l l y unknown i n advance. The same h o l d s true for the interest rate.

M a t h e m a t i c a l programming models can determ i ne the s i zes of components which are present in t h e i r f o r m u l a t i o n - i f allowed they can zero out values, thereby d e l e t i n g p r o p o s e d components - b u t t h e y c a n n o t ' i n v e n t ' new components w h e r e such w e r e n o t i n c l u d e d b y t h e analyst i n formulating t h e model. Thus model f o r m u l a t i o n does c o n t a i n some a l t e r n a t i v e s e l e c t i o n . The a n a l y s t m u s t t h e r e f o r e be c a r e f u l t o include i n t h e model a l l r e a s o n a b l e alternatives, and n o t s c r e e n out a r b i t r a r i l y such a l t e r n a t i v e s .

Question 17:
Many models h a v e been used o v e r (LP, DP) t h e years: optimization and simulation (deterministic, stochastic). For p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s , t h e TEKUMA model (Schwart e t a l . , 1981a.b. 1982) has become the standard t o o l . I t i s a package o f i nc 1 udes the programs which f o l l o w i n g components:

Question 75:
Decisions in Israel's water sector are made by t h e Water Commissioner. He has appointed several committees t o a i d him i n t h i s m a t t e r , so t h a t each p l a n must pass t h r o u g h an e l a b o r a t e c h e c k i n g and a p p r o v a l p r o c e s s . For i m p o r t a n t

-161-

(a) A m a t r i x g e n e r a t o r . Given the b a s i c d a t a , i t 'expands' i t i n t o t h e f u l l c o e f f i c i e n t m a t r i x and i t o u t an MPSX input writes f i le. (b) S o l u t i o n o f t h e LP by M P S X . (c) A report generator. G i ven it s p e c i f i c a t i o n s by t h e user w r i t e s out the tables o f the output in a convenient and u s e f u l form. The L P following: model considers the

Question 78:
The models w h i c h have been u s e d i n t h e p a s t , and t h e TEKUMA model as w e l l , a r e always s u b j e c t t o a long and detai led t e s t i ng and v e r i f i c a t i o n process. W r e p e a t h e r e a comment made e earlier. The systems a n a l y s t s have an o n e r o u s responsibility t o make certain that before any f i n a l r e s u l t s a r e g e n e r a t e d w i t h a model it i s f r e e of logical and d a t a errors. If t h i s i s n o t done e a r l y enough i n t h e s t u d y t h e n more l i k e l y t h a n n o t such e r r o r s w i l l become apparent later, as r e s u l t s a r e for the final plan studied formulation, c a s t i n g doubt on t h e e n t i r e s t u d y and rendering the modelling e f f o r t useless.

t i m e p e r i o d s over (a) A number o f the planning horizon (e.g. 5 y e a r s , 10 y e a r s )

(b)

Each p e r i o d i s r e p r e s e n t e d b y y e a r , d i v i d e d i n t o seasons.

Question 19:
(c) c o n d i t i ons Sever a 1 h y d r o 1 o g i c are considered, each representing a d i f f e r e n t level o f water a v a i l a b i l i t y a t the sources (e.g. dry, average, wet) See answers questions. to previous

Question 20:
Disciplines participating in i nc 1 ude: planning s t u d i es and i r r i g a t i on, agr ic u l t u r e agricultural economics, hydrology, hydraulic engineering, water and sewage treatment, eng i neer i ng economics.

(d) Two types of water (e.g. potable, non-potable) are identified. Sources and l i n k s ( p i p e s , c h a n n e l s ) b e l o n g t o one or the other type. Consumers may t o l e r a t e up t o a given percent o f e i ther type i n t h e i r supply. (e) Over-year storage. (f) and within-year

5. Planning Stage Development of Final Project Specifications

4:

Question 21:
Lower bounds o n demands m u s t be met. Consumers may b e a b l e t o p u r c h a s e more, d e p e n d i n g o n t h e cost of the water d e l i v e r e d t o them and t h e b e n e f i t t h e y can derive from using i t . v a r i ab1 es are: in each capacity expansion annua 1 and seasona 1 p e r i od, o p e r a t i o n i n t h e t y p i c a l year o f each p e r i o d , o f t h e s o u r c e s and 1 inks. See Q u e s t i o n 1 7 .

Question 22:
C o s t - b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s has been employed i n s p e c i f i c d e s i g n s t u d i e s . I n planning studies the objective i s usually t o minimize cost, since the l e v e l o f s u p p l y and o f service is imposed

(9) D e c i s i o n

Question 23:
Explicit risk or impact analyses a r e n o t performed usual-ly.

T h i s model has been d e v e l o p e d a t Tahal over t h e p a s t y e a r s , and has been u s e d t o s t u d y t h e e n t i r e n a t i o n a l s y s t e m and s e v e r a l r e g i o n a l plans.

References Question 24:

M u l t i - o b j e c t i v e methods have been t r i e d ( A l k a n and S h a m i r , 1 9 8 0 ) , used on a r o u t i n e b a s i s . More o f t e n , s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s i s used t o explore t h e t r a d e - o f f s between objectives A l k a n , D . , and Shamir, U. (1980). "Multiple objective planning of a regional water resources 439-465 in sys tern", pp. O p e r a t i o n s Research i n A g r i c u l t u r e and W a t e r R e s o u r c e s , Ed. by C. Tapiero, D.Yaron and N o r t h - H o l l a n d P u b l i s h i n g Co. Gablinger, M., Schwarz, J., and Y. (1972). "Use of Yardi, systems approach in planning Israel I s water resources management". International Symposium on Water Resources P l a n n i n g , Mexi Co. Schwarz, J., et al. (1981). "Framework plan for Israel's water sector''. Progress r e p o r t no. 11: Formulation of the for the national TEKUMA model plan'', R e p o r t No. 01/81/51 (in Hebrew), T a h a l - Water Planning for Israel Ltd. Schwarz, J., et al. (1981). " S o u t h e r n Arava - F o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e TEKUMA model model for a master plan". Report No. 0 1 / 8 1 / 2 4 ( i n Hebrew), Tahal Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e l L t d .
J., et al. (1982) Schwarz, "Framework plan for Israel's water sector". Progress r e p o r t no. 12: Extreme s c e n a r i o s for d e v e l o p m e n t t o t h e end o f t h e century (analysis with the TEKUMA mode 1) ' I , Report No. 01/82/11 ( i n Hebrew), Tahal Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e l L t d .

Question 25:
See above.

Question 26:
O p t i m a l s o l u t i o n s g e n e r a t e d by models a r e u s e d t o f o r m u l a t e f i n a l p l a n s , which a r e t h e n approved v i a t h e process discussed i n Question

Question 27:
See Q u e s t i o n

15.

Question 28:
Projects are a l l funded from t h e n a t i o n a l budget a l l o c a t e d t o t h e water sector, e x c e p t some local in whose funding the projects consumers p a r t i c i p a t e .

Questions 29:
No e x p l i c i t s t u d y has been carried out t o evaluate a specific a p l a n n i n g process. The part of goes on almost analysi s continuously, and p a s t p l a n s a r e c o n s t a n t l y under re-evaluation and modification.

6. Planning Stage 5: Design Question 30:

Project
Schwarz, J., et al. (1981). Report "TEKUMA u s e r ' s manua 1 ' I . No. 01/81/50 ( i n Hebrew), Tahal - Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e l L t d . Schwarz, J . , Meidad, N. and Shamir U. (1 985) "Water qual it y management i n r e g i n a l systems". 341-349 i n S c i e n t i f i c B a s i s pp. f o r Water Resources management, IAHS P u b l i c a t i o n No. 153, Ed. by M. D i s k i n . (1980). "Application of Shamir, U . operations research i n Israel's water s e c t o r " . European J o u r n a l o f O p e r a t i o n a l Research, V o l . 5 , PP. 3 3 4 - 3 3 4 5 .

D e t a i l e d d e s i g n and d r a w i n g s a r e prepared by o t h e r departments o f Tahal. There i s a c l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e s y s t e m s a n a l y s t s and t h e designers.

-163-

PROMOTION OF MULTIPURPOSE WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES IN THE TIRNAVA MARE BASIN

P. STEGAROIU, I DIMA, R. AMAFTIESEI, V.VISAN Research and Design Institute for Water Resources Engineering, ICPGA, Spl. lndependentei 294 C.P. 7895 Bucharest, Romania

1.

Introduction

Multipurpose river bas i n a t both flood development,aiming control and t h e r a t i o n a l use o f water resources, p l a y s a s i g n i f i c a n t role for t h e economic and s o c i a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f Romania. Thus, s i n c e t h e ' 5 0 s when t h e f i r s t n a t i o n a l f i v e years p l a n s were in full progress, an i n c r e a s i n g a t t e n t i o n was g i v e n t o t h e w a t e r problem, starting with the development of the hydropower potential. L a t e r , t h e comprehensive w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management schemes w e r e studied; during 1959 - 1962, t h e mu1 t i p u r p o s e water resources d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s f o r each r i v e r b a s i n and f o r t h e w h o l e c o u n t r y Water M a s t e r P l a n - were p r e p a r e d . The n e c e s s a r y methodological procedures concerning the o u t l i n e o f r i v e r b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s and the guidelines f o r solving the imp1 i e d technical and economic problems were p r e p a r e d w i t h i n a close cooperation o f the involved interdisciplinary specialists. Water M a s t e r P l a n s e r v e d as a v a l u a b l e base o f subsequent five years p l a n s f o r water resources development.

A systematic activity I S implemented within the water r e s o u r c e s management p l a n n i n g f i e l d c o n s i s t i n g o f p e r i o d i c a l adapting of l o n g - t e r m f o r e c a s t s and o f f r a m e w o r k r i v e r b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t schemes i n connection w i t h the social-economic development f i v e y e a r s p l a n s . This a c t i v i t y , as w e l l as t h e project/design planning a c t i v i t y , r e p r e s e n t s an a p p r o p r i a t e f r a m e w o r k to implement and develop the methodological tools including the system a n a l y s i s techniques as a maj o r component. The above-mentioned t e c h n i q u e s a r e a l s o a p p l i e d when p r e p a r i n g and u p d a t i n g long-term reservoir operation r u l e s as w e l l as f o r s u p p o r t i n g o p e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n s of water resources system i n t h e day-by-day a c t i v i t y . Following the catastrophic floods of 1970, w h i c h damaged c e r t a i n areas i n the country, and based on t h e m e n t i o n e d Water M a s t e r Plan, there was initiated the Mu 1 t i p u r p o s e Comprehensive Development P l a n , f o r t h e Upper Mures r i v e r basin, t h e so c a l l e d "Mures Project". T h i s p r o j e c t examined t h e general framework of regional development and t h e r e l a t e d w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management p r o b l e m s . The problems, wide both variety technical
of the ones

-164-

hydrology, hydrogeology, geology, h y d r o e n g i n e e r i n g , w a t e r management, - and t h o s e land reclamation concerning economic,demographic, h o u s i n g and s o c i a l a s p e c t s , r e q u i r e d the participation of Romanian personnel from many specialized governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the country. An i m p o r t a n t s u p p o r t was UNDP, consisting of from the technical assistance by highly qual i f i e d U.N. experts and fellowship training programmes granted t o Romanian specialists i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o j e c t development. The d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e Mures P r o j e c t gave a good o p p o r t u n i t y t o update, e x t e n d and improve the m e t h o d o l o g i c a l t o o l s used f o r r i v e r b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p r o b l e m s and f o r t h e promotion o f water resources management s y s t e m s . T i r n a v a Mare, as a s u b b a s i n within the Upper Mures basin was also analyzed for a m u l t i p u r p o s e development, t h e m a j o r and more u r g e n t problems b e i n g regional planning, p o p u l a t i o n and economic objectives protection against floods, and low flow augmentation to permit water provision for population, industry and i r r i g a t i o n . The s t u d i e s concerning the f e a s i b i l i t y a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r f ood p r o t e c t i o n consisted mainly of: ana 1 y s e s of f hydrological p a r a m e t e r s under var actual conditions and f o r assumed possibi 1 it i e s rainfall-runoff occurrence distribution;

along the r i v e r being thus achieved. Embankment w o r k s , upon t h e w a t e r s c o n t r o l l e d by r e s e r v o i r s f l o o d f l o w , were a d o p t e d o n l y i n l i m i t e d zones, namely t o p r o t e c t human s e t t l e m e n t s . The p e r f o r m e d a n a l y s e s showed a h i g h e f f e c t i v e n e s s f o r t h e proposed flood control facilities, as t h e e x p e c t e d a n n u a l a v e r a g e damage w i l l decrease t o l e s s t h a n 4% o f its value i n the pre-existing s i t u a t i o n . Bes i d e s t h e h y d r o e n g i neer i ng works for flood control, i.e. embankment works, river bed r e g u l a t i o n and d e t e n t i o n / t e m p o r a r y reservoirs the r iver bas i n i nc 1 uded development scheme mu1t i purpose r e s e r v o i r s a1 so with conservation storage capac i t y for 1 ow f lor augmentation i n d r y p e r i o d s .

Now, a f t e r t e n y e a r s f r o m t h e Upper Mures P r o j e c t s t a r t p e r i o d , most of the hydroengineering s t r u c t u r e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare r i v e r b a s i n a r e a l r e a d y under o p e r a t i o n o r i n an advanced s t a g e o f c o m p l e t i o n . planning process for water management facilities i n T i r n a v a Mare r i v e r basin is illustrated in the following, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e adopted questionaire. The

mu 1 t i p u r p o s e

ood the ous of and

2. Planning Stage 1: lnitiatation and Prel irninary Planning

Question 1

Project

survey o f experienced flood of damage and determ in a t ion p o t e n t i a l f l o o d damages;

- economic f e a s i b i l i t y a n a l y s e s for the selection o f flood control scheme.

Within the adopted water resources development scheme, s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r s p l a y t h e most significant role, an important levels r e d u c t i o n o f maximum f l o w

I n Romania, t h e framework o f a planned development i n t h e f i e l d o f w a t e r has been i n i t i a l l y d e f i n e d by a Decree i s s u e d i n 1953 r e g a r d i n g t h e r a t i o n a l u t i l i z a t i o n , management and p r o t e c t i o n o f w a t e r resources. The Decree s t i p u l a t e d t h e p r o m o t i o n o f a m u l t i p u r p o s e w a t e r management and t h e c o n d i t i o n s imposed f o r a l l t h e water r e l a t e d w o r k . On t h e b a s i s o f t h e mentioned Decree, t h e r e have been e l a b o r a t e d the f i r s t r i v e r basins multipurpose w a t e r management p l a n s and i n 1962

t h e long term water resources development p l a n f o r t h e w h o l e c o u n t r y L a t e r on, f o r c e r t a i n a r e a s , as required, the water resources development schemes have been updated. The p r o m o t i o n o f m u l t i p u r p o s e w a t e r management i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare r iver bas i n observed the above-mentioned g e n e r a l l i n e . The s o l u t i o n s for protection a g a i n s t t h e f l o o d s and, for users' water s u p p l y h a v e been e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h i n an integrated long term a n a l ys i s . Thus, u s i n g our own e x p e r i e n c e of water in the elaboration r e s o u r c e s d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s and w i t h the assistance of U.N. - U.N.D.P., during 1972-1975 t h e r e has been prepared a comprehensive m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y development p l a n f o r t h e Upper Mures r i v e r b a s i n , t h e s o - c a l l e d "Mures Project". This p l a n was a p r o g r e s s f r o m t h e p o i n t o f view o f conception of the r e g i ona 1 planning e 1 emen t s consideration, within the r i v e r b a s i n s development, as well as r e g a r d i n g t h e methods t h a t h a v e been used o r d e v e l o p e d . The n e c e s s i t y o f integrating water r e l a t e d works in a unitary c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e complex management and compehensive and r a t i o n a l u s e o f water resources i s u n d e r l i n e d i n t h e Water Act (Law) a d o p t e d i n Romania i n 1974. T h i s Law s t a t e s (in art. 4) t h e e l a b o r a t i o n o f a framework scheme f o r r i v e r b a s i n s d e v e l o p m e n t , as w e l l as (in art. 30) that documents for the p r o j ec t hydroengineering s t r u c t u r e s , or for water r e l a t e d works, should take i n t o account t h e s t i p u l a t i o n s of t h e framework w a t e r r e l a t e d d e v e l o p m e n t schemes. The same Law s t a t e s (in art. 36) that for hydroengineering or water related p r o j e c t documents t h e r e m u s t b e o b t a i n e d t h e agreement o f w a t e r management a u t h o r i t y . The Law a l s o s t a t e s ( i n a r t . 37) t h a t b y t h e agreement o f w a t e r management

authority, t h e water users are o b l i g e d t o a c h i e v e t h e w o r k s and t o t a k e n e c e s s a r y measures i n o r d e r to a v o i d d i s t u r b i n g o t h e r u s e s and t o p r e v e n t damages i n t h e a r e a . The framework w a t e r resources development schemes, r e v i e w e d e v e r y 5 y e a r s , and t h e e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e water management agreement for hydroengineering s t r u c t u r e s and f o r any o t h e r w a t e r related objective, c o n s t i t u t e premises f o r s o l v i n g t h e i m m e d i a t e as we1 as t h e f u t u r e w a t e r management p r o b l e m s in a r a t i o n a l manner n accordance w i t h their importance f o r t h e general development o f t h e c o u n t r y .

Question 2
The c o o r d i n a t i o n o f activities for t h e development o f t h e r e q u i r e d studies i n different stages and p r o j e c t documents, as w e l l as t h e promotion of water related development facilities has b e e n accompl i shed by the Permanent E x e c u t i v e Body o f t h e Upper Mures Project. The e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e c o m p l e x water r e s o u r c e s management scheme and the necessary methodology improvement have been a c h i e v e d b y t h e R e s e a r c h and D e s i g n I n s t i t u t e f o r Water Resources Engineering ( I CPGA)

The w i d e v a r i e t y o f problems, both technical ones - h y d r o l o g i c , hydrogeology, geo 1 o g y , h y d r o e n g i n e e r i n g , w a t e r management, land reclamation and those concerning economic, demographic, h o u s i n g and s o c i a l a s p e c t s , r e q u i r e d the participation of Romani a n personnel from many s p e c i a l i z e d governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s . An i m p o r t a n t s u p p o r t was from t h e UNDP c o n s i s t i n g o f technical assistance by h i g h l y q u a l i f i e d U.N. e x p e r t s and f e l l o w s h i p s training programmes granted to Romanian specialists involved i n the p r o j e c t development. Since t h e beginning of P r o j e c t and t h r o u g h o u t the the

Mures

-166-

p r e p a r a t i o n o f p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s and p r o j e c t documents, for the main hydroengineering structures, the 1 oca 1 authorities have been consulted. These supported the p r i o r i t y of solving flood protection for human settlements and the economic o b j e c t i v e s , as w e l l as i n t h e p r o v i s i o n o f supplementary f l o w s f o r p o p u l a t i o n and i n d u s t r i a l u s e r s .

The p r o b l e m has been s o l v e d through cooperation among specialists, local a u t h o r i t i e s and t h e decision-makers. Thus, i n some a r e a s where t h e m i n o r r i v e r bed had become v e r y n a r r o w as a r e s u l t o f urban development i n the past a severe systematization area was of the bui 1t necessary. Some o f t h e embankment and r i v e r bed r e g u l a t i o n w o r k s have been c o m p l e t e d i n 1974 - 1975. Now by t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f the principal f l o o d c o n t r o l s t o r a g e and d e t e n t i o n p o o l s , p r o p e r degrees o f security against f l o o d s have been a v o i ded

Question 3
The Mures P r o j e c t and the promotion of water resources management f a c i l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare r i v e r b a s i n , as p a r t o f this project, have been intiated f o l l o w i n g the line of integrating t h e w a t e r management a c t i v i t y i n t h e s o c i a l - e c o n o m i c development o f the c o u n t r y (see Q u e s t i o n 1 ) .
A t t h e same t i m e , t h e d e c i s i o n regarding the initiation of the p r o j e c t has been d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e f 1 oods of 1970 which caused i m p o r t a n t damages t o t h e p o p u l a t e d centres and to the econom i c o b j e c t i v e s i n t h e area.

Question 5
The e x i s t i n g m e t h o d o l o g y for t h e Water Master Plan, for the framework w a t e r r e a t e d development schemes and f o r t h e p l a n n i n g o f the w a t e r managements s stem s e r v e d as a s t a r t i n g p o i n t and t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f p o s s i b e improvements d u r i n g t h e project development has been dec i ded

Question 4
I n g e n e r a l , t h e r e have n o t b e e n restrictive constraints maj o r a f f e c t i n g t h e development o f the project. As a r e s t r i c t i v e c o n s t r a i n t , imposed b y t h e l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s d u e t o some p o t e n t i a l damaged l o c a l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare m a j o r r i v e r bed, t h e r e s h o u l d be m e n t i o n e d t h e u r g e n t requirement t o increase by local works t h e degree of protection against floods i n the p r i n c i p a l human s e t t l e m e n t s . The d i m e n s i o n o f those local works had to be conceived t o ensure, together w i t h the e f f e c t of considered flood control storage capacities, the r e q u i r e d degree o f s e c u r i t y . The a c h i e v e m e n t o f l o c a l w o r k s ( r i v e r beds t r a i n i n g , embankment, and o t h e r s ) r e p r e s e n t s a t r a n s i t i o n s o l u t i o n achieving t o a great extent t h e aim of protection against floods.

The necessary improvements r e f e r m a i n l y t o t h e e x t e n s i o n and the r e f i nement of mathematical models f o r f l o o d occurrence, to estimations, and hydraul ic e s t i m a t i o n s o f w a t e r management from a q u a n t i t a t i v e and w a t e r q u a l i t y p o i n t o f view.

3.

Planning Stage 2: Data Gathering and Processing Question 6

W i t h i n t h e p r o j e c t t h e r e have been used b e s i d e s h y d r o l o g i c a l d a t a , f ' l ood damages, data r e g a r d i ng demographical data, and elements r e g a r d i n g t h e economic development of t h e a r e a and r e g a r d i n g w a t e r requirements. These data are d i s c u s s e d w i t h Q u e s t i o n 7.

Question 7
Analysis of f l o o d hydrological

-167-

parameters was p e r f o r m e d i n two ways: first, by processing the observed avai l a b l e data (a 20 continuous observation period o f y e a r s supplemented w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t historical f l o o d e v e n t from a p e r i o d o f o v e r 100 years), and second, by mathematical modeling o f r a i n f a l l runoff process, for r e1evant scenarios regarding the r a i n f a l l d i s t r i b u t i o n i n various river basin areas. The f l o o d h y d r o g r a p h s and t h e peak flows, r e s p e c t i v e l y maximum l e v e l s , were t h u s o b t a i n e d f o r the f l o w r e g i m e and s e r v e d as natural base i n p u t d a t a i n t h e f e a s i b i l i t y analysis of the structural flood control alternatives.
As w a t e r r e s o u r c e s d a t a t h e r e have been used a s e r i e s o f a v e r a g e monthly f l o w s f o r t h e p e r i o d 1950 -1970 considered as f i t t e d f o r t h e estimation of water management balance r e g a r d i n g t h e water uses.

damages experienced during the floods of May 1970 when o n t h e T i r n a v a Mare t h e r e w e r e r e c o r d e d maximum levels close to 1% occurrence p r o b a b i l i t y . The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f damages along t h e r i v e r showed a m a j o r c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n urban centres, the maximum weights belonging to industrial units (64% o f total losses) and f o r s u b s t r u c t u r e s and r e s i d e n c e s (34% o f t o t a l ) . Based o n t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f the 1970 f l o o d damages and o n p o t e n t i a l damages, gathered by inquiry e s t i m a t i o n s , f o r two f l o o d l e v e l s o f 5% and 0.5 - 0.1% o c c u r r e n c e p r o a b i l i t y , t h e "maximurn level/peak f l o w - f l o o d damage" r e l a t i o n s h i p s were d e t e r m i n e d . The "damage probabi 1 i t y " functions could be o b t a i n e d b y combining t h e " f l o w - damage" and occurrence the "maximum flow r e 1 a t i onsh i p s ; probabi 1 i t y " furthermore the annual average p o t e n t i a l damages were d e t e r m i n e d i n the major areas for the given/existing s i t u a t i o n s and f o r t h e f u t u r e development pattern of t h e areas, tak.ing i n t o account t h e economic g r o w t h and d i s c o u n t i n g t h e damage v a 1 ues

For t h e s y n t h e t i c g e n e r a t i o n o f h y d r o l o g i c a l d a t a (as a v e r a g e a n n u a l f l o w s and a v e r a g e m o n t h l y f l o w s , w i t h and w i t h o u t consideration of self-correlation) e x i s t i n g models have been a d o p t e d f r o m relevant publications and were e l a b o r a t e d i n t o computer programmes. The l o w degree of regularization of the examined s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r s d i d n o t r e q u i r e t h e use o f s y n t h e t i c f l o w g e n e r a t i o n models f o r the water management e s t i m a t i o n s . The d a t a r e g a r d i n g w a t e r needs for i r r i g a t i o n h a v e been d e t e r m i n e d for t h e p e r i o d 1950 -1970, as average monthly values u s i n g t h e potential e v a p o t r a n s p i r a t i o n method and t h e s o i l w a t e r balance. A m a t h e m a t i c a l model f o r t h e s y n t h e t i c g e n e r a t i o n o f i r r i g a t i o n w a t e r need values on t h e b a s i s o f temperature and r a i n f a l l s d a t a has been t r i e d , b u t t h e r e s u l t s have not been satisfactory. The a n a l y s i s o f f l o o d damage s t a r t e d w i t h t h e survey o f f l o o d

Question 8
The d a t a c o l l e c t i o n methods have been e s t a b l i s h e d o n t h e b a s i s of e n g i n e e r i n g analyses. As the study p e r i o d for t h e average monthly f l o w s , t h e r e has been t a k e n t h e 1950 -1970 p e r i o d w i t h more r e l i a b l e d a t a and w i t h a s u f f i c i e n t l e n g t h f o r t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e water resources - water demand b a l a n c e .

Question 9
The e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a has b e e n made on t h e b a s i s o f the analyses performed by t h e s p e c i a l i s t s and p r e s e n t e d w i t h i n a p 3 n e l o r g a n i z e d b y t h e Permanent E x e c u t i v e Body o f t h e p r o j e c t , w i t h experts. the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f U.N.

-1.08-

Question 10
Among o t h e r s , i n t h e a n a l y s e s regarding the registered flood hydrographs i n the subbasin, t h e r e has been used t h e s i m u l a t i o n model and of flood waves r o u t i ng c o m p o s i t i o n , namely UNDA / l / , a l s o used a f t e r w a r d s i n t h e e s t i m a t i o n o f the flood control scheme alternatives.

structures in cons i d e r e d alternatives o f t h e water resources development scheme. The a l t e r n a t i v e s were p r o p o s e d by technicians/experts and established through discussions o r g a n i z e d b y t h e Permanent E x e c u t i v e - P.E.B. - witll the Body UN - UNDP e x p e r t s participation of w i t h i n consulting missions.

4. Planning Stage 3: Formulation and Screening of Project AI ternat ives

Question 75:
The h i e r a r c h i c a l structure of the decision-making p r o c e s s has r e s u l t e d f r o m t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and development p a t t e r n o f t h e p r o j e c t , as m e n t i o n e d i n Q u e s t i o n 2 . The p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e a 1 t e r natives was made b y spec a1 i z e d i n s t i t u t e s and b y t h e P.E.B with t h e a s s i s t a n c e o f UN e x p e r t s . o p t i ons The t e c h n i ca 1 have been t a k e n by the p r e l m i nary approval o f proposed s o l u t ons a t involved m i n i s t r i e s i n agric 1ture, water, forestry and regional p l a n n i n g problems. The f i n a l d e c i s i o n was t a k e n a t governmental level t h a t approved, f o r each h y d r o e n g i n e e r i n g structure (but t a k i n g i n t o account the general framework, t h e t e c h n i c a l s o l u t i o n s ) , t h e f i n a n c i n g and m a t e r i a l s means and n e c e s s a r y manpower. The t r a d e - o f f a s p e c t s have been t r e a t e d by qualitative implicit estimations. Thus, f o r some s t o r a g e reservoirs the requirements o f the dam's construction and those concerning the storage/reservoir area d i d n o t f i t , such t h a t t h e examination o f l o c a t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s was imposed. There have been preferred locations with more d i f f i c u l t conditions for t h e dam's c o n s t r u c t i o n s b u t more f a v o u r a b l e ones f o r t h e s t o r a g e a r e a .

Question 1 1
Roughly, for the formulation and s c r e e n i n g o f w a t e r management alternatives i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare R i v e r b a s i n t h e r e have b e e n used a b o u t 60 man-months and 300 h o u r s o f computer f a c i l i t i e s ( I B H 360 and I C L

1905)
Question 12
The p r o m o t i o n o f m u l t i p u r p o s e water r e s o u r c e s development i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare R i v e r B a s i n , as w e l l a s t h e w h o l e Mures p r o j e c t , has been s u p p o r t e d b y t h e Romanian Government w i t h e q u i p m e n t , f i n a n c i a l means and computer facilities (see Q u e s t i o n 2)

Question 13
As was m e n t i o n e d i n Q u e s t i o n 2 , s i n c e t h e i n i t i a t i o n and a l o n g w i t h the planning activity for the p r i nc i p a 1 h y d r o e n g i n e e r i ng s t r u c t u r e s t h e r e has been p e r m a n e n t cooperation with the 1 oca 1 a u t h o r i t i es and other r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the p u b l i c i n t h e area.

Question 14
T h e r e have been examined 7 major groups o f alternatives for m u l t i p u r p o s e w a t e r management and a l o t o f s u b a l t e r n a t i v e s determined by of socio-economic hypotheses deve 1 opment , hydrological data (flood occurrence patterns) , and parameters of the techn ica 1

Question 16:
There are not addi t i onal mentions o t h e r t h a n those o f Q u e s t i o n

4.

-109-

Question 17:
The d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e Mures P r o j e c t gave a good o p p o r t u n i t y t o update, e x t e n d and improve the methodological t o o l s used f o r r i v e r b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p r o b l e m s and f o r t h e p r o m o t i o n of water resources management s y s t e m s .

c h a n n e l s and f l o o d waves c o m p o s i t i o n as w e l l . Computation procedures u s e d w i t h i n t h e s i m p l i f i e d model a r e for reservoir the Puls method routing and Musk i ngum and Kalinin-Miliukov methods f o r r i v e r bed r o u t i n g / 8 , 1 8 / . The p o s s i b l e c o n j u n c t i v e u s e o f UNDA and PRAT m o d e l s is to be mentioned. As t h e input d a t a f o r t h e UNDA model implies important t e c h n i c a l and f i n a n c i a l e f f o r t , the PRAT model i s used t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e s e l e c t i o n o f zones f o r m o r e d e t a i l e d analyses. On t h e o t h e r hand, when that t h e UNDA model c a n be a p p l i e d , i s v e r y u s e f u l even i n p r e l i m i n a r y studies t o help the calibration of the PRAT model parameters, an important increase of PRAT r e s u l t s accuracy b e i n g obtained. Therefore, it is more efficient to do preliminary screening for the s e l e c t i o n o f t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be d e t a i l e d b y UNDA model, a higher o p e r a t i v i t y i n s o l v i n g t h e problem and a n i m p o r t a n t s a v i n g o f computer t i m e and f u n d s b e i n g a c h i e v e d .
I n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e use o f t h e m e n t i o n e d s i m u l a t i o n models a p r o g r e s s was a c h i e v e d i n preparing r a i n f a l l - r u n o f f models/ 5 , 2 3 / .

m a t hema t i ca 1 models, The largely applied w i t h i n the project, were t h o s e o f q u a n t i t a t i v e water management ( f o r flood control and f o r t h e w a t e r management b a l a n c e ) .
The UNDA m a t h e m a t i c simlJlation model and t h e a s s o c i a t e d computer programme / 1/ , based on the numer i ca 1 integration of the Saint-Venant e q u a t i o n system, was a p p l i e d a l o n g t h e whole development of the p r o j e c t t o perform the a n a l y s e s o f t h e h y d r a u l i c and f l o o d con t r o 1 parameters (reservoi r r o u t i n g , f l o o d waves c o m p o s i t i o n and channel r o u t i n g ) . This model, prepared and a p p l i e d i n Romania p r e v i o u s l y , has been r e f i n e d during the Mures Project. As t h e UNDA s i m u l a t i o n model r e q u i r e s as i n p u t data a s e t o f characteristic parameters representing in fact unknown quantities of t h e problem, the to be number of a 1 t e r n a t i ves examined was too high. Moreover, d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e UNDA model being rather sophisticated, is computer t i m e consuming, o u t o f the numerous p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s , o n l y a few ones were s e l e c t e d f o r s u c h a detailed analysis. The P r e l i m i n a r y screening of alternatives was a c h i e v e d m o s t l y based on h e u r i s t i c ana 1 yses and approximative/expeditious procedures. The s i m p l i f i e d s i m u l a t i o n model PRAT was d e v e l o p e d i n t h i s respect, based o n l e s s a c c u r a t e c o m p u t a t i o n procedures, but o f f er i ng high e f f i c i e n c y as w e l l a s r a p i d i t y . model This through routing performs flood reservoirs, or

B e s i d e s t h e PRAT simplified simulation model, for the preliminary screening o f structural alternatives (and t h e r e f o r e f o r t h e system parameters selection), a preoptimization mode 1 was e x p e r i m e n t e d on, based on the 1 inear programming separable a 1 g o r i thm /8/.

T h i s model aims t o f i n d o u t t h e most f a v o u r a b l e Combinations o f the local f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n works i n t h e damaged zones and s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r waves flood for capac i t y alleviation.

The a n a l y s i s i s performed on t h e maximum f l o w i n each z o n e t o b e protected, without taking into account t h e e x p l i c i t behaviour of t h e system by t i m e i n t e r v a l s w i t h i n t h e f l o o d wave.

-170-

I n p u t d a t a f o r t h e model a r e :

- cost functions (investment c o s t p r e s e n t v a l u e p l u s t h e sum o f annual expenditures converted to present values) f o r local p r o t e c t i o n i n each zone t o be protected, d e p e n d i n g on t h e maximum f l o w i n t h e r e s p e c t i v e zone:
cost functions (investment c o s t p r e s e n t v a l u e p l u s t h e sum o f expenditures converted to annua 1 for f 1 ood waves p r e s e n t v a 1 ues) a1 l e v i a i o n b y r e s e r v o i r s , d e p e n d i n g i n the on max mum f l o w r e d u c t i o n reservo r s i t e : influence of coefficients, express ng t h e r e d u c t i o n e f f e c t o f s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r o n t h e maximum f l o w i n each zone t o b e p r o t e c t e d : maximum f l o w v a l u e s i n each to be protected, for the zone occurrence p r o b a b i l i t y corresponding to the required protection level/degree. The model results are the maximum flow reduction in the reservoir s i t e s and t h e m o d i f i e d maximum f l o w v a l u e s i n each zone t o be protected, m i n i m i z i ng the effort in storage econom i c r e s e r v o i r s and i n local protection works. For the water management b a l a n c e t h e r e have been u s e d m o s t l y existing mathematic s imu 1 a t i o n models e x a m i n i n g i n m o n t h l y v a l u e s t h e b e h a v i o u r o f w a t e r management systems u p t o g e t t i n g t h e d e s i r e d parameters ( t h e achievement o f t h e necessary degrees f o r m e e t i n g w a t e r needs f o r d i f f e r e n t categories o f users). As r e l a t e d t o the study of t e c h n i c a l parameters of m u l t i p u r p o s e water management systems, the - o p t i m i z a t i o n model simulation SIMOPT / 1 1 / and the associated computer programme w e r e d e v e l o p e d . The SIMOPT m o d e l , representing an i m p r o v e d and e x t e n d e d a d a p t a t i o n of p r e v i o u s procedures developed by A. F i l i p k o v s k i and J . Ian King,

K i n d l e r w i t h i n the V i s t u l a p r o j e c t for the use of (1 969- 197 1 ) O u t - o f - K i l t e r network a l g o r i t h m / l 5 , 16, 28/, d o e s p e r m i t , f o r example:

- t h e e x p l i c i t a n a l y s i s of water flow within the river b a s i n / w a t e r management system:

- t a k i n g i n t o account t h e water q u a l i t y p r o t e c t i o n requirements, as a dilution flow condition, downstream t h e r e t u r n f r o m t h e w a t e r users : - consideration, within the a total storage capacity, of variable conservative capacity during the year months, in complementarity with the flood p r o t e c t i o n one;

- computation t h e factual degree/probability o f meeting t h e water management r e q u i rements, e x p r e s s e d a s f r e q u e n c y , as d u r a t i o n and as q u a n t i t y (volume) as w e l l .

T h i s model river basins Romani a . i s now a p p l i e d i n 6 or subbasins in

W i t h i n t h e p r o j e c t t h e r e have been prepared a l s o mathematical models f o r w a t e r q u a l i t y problems: one o f them i s a s i m u l a t i o n model for thermic pollution, w h i c h was a p p l i e d a f t e r some r e f i n e m e n t s , Question 18:

A l l t h o s e m e n t i o n e d models were tested w i t h i n the p r o j e c t .

The calibration and v e r i f i c a t i o n , as a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r an e f f i c i e n t use o f t h e models i n t h e s t u d i e d p r o b l e m , needed i n the c a s e o f t h e UNDA model d e t a i l e d d a t a concerning t h e t o p o g r a p h y and t h e n a t u r e o f r i v e r beds ( i n c l u d i n g l o n g and c r o s s p r o f i l e s , and r o u g h n e s s , and data regarding t h e recorded f l o o d hydrographs. improved The UNDA model was w i t h i n t h e Mures P r o j e c t , and t h e achievement of t h e SIMOPT model needed a d a p t a t i o n s and e x t e n s i o n s o f

-171-

other similar models, aspects mentioned w i t h i n Q u e s t i o n 17.

Question 19:
The final s o l u t ion was e s t a b l i s h e d and approved f o r each' hydroengineering structure taking i n t o account i t s a r t i c u l a t i o n w i t h t h e framework p l a n . The p a r t i c i p a t i o n and t h e r o l e of the technical experts, the d , e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and t h e pub1 i c were shown w i t h i n Q u e s t i o n 15.

As a b a s e i n the elaboration and the improvement of the m a t h e m a t i c a l models one may m e n t i o n as more i m p o r t a n t t h e b o o k s and papers/23, 2 5 , 2 9 / f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l /15, 25, 28/ as c o n c e r n s and quantitative water management balance computation. The t e c h n i c a l literature was mos t used included following: that the

CHIRIAC, V . , e t a l . - Lacuri de a c u m u l a r e (Storage r e s e r v o i r s ) , Edit. CERES, Bucuresti, Romania,

Question 20:
By i t s nature, the project needed a t i g h t c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n the experts o f several fields: hydrology, hydroengineering, demography, hous i ng , r e g i ona 1 p l a n n i n g , w a t e r management. The n e c e s s a r y s t r u c t u r e has been p r o v i d e d b y t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p r o j e c t o f t h e Water Resouces Management I n s t i t u t e - I C P G A - and of other i n s t i t u t e s related t o the g i v e n problem. The c o o p e r a t i o n within the project showed t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f an interdisciplinary terminology as well as t h e m a j o r r o l e o f the workshops i n order t o c l a r i f y and approach t h e p o s i t i ons of the participants involved i n the project development.

1976.
DIACONU, C . , et al. - Some p o s s i b i l i t i e s for reconstructing the data corresponding to natural hydrological conditions - Casebook of computation of on methods quantitative changes in the hydrological regime o f r i v e r b a s i n s due t o human a c t i v i t y . P r o j e c t 5.1. - I.H.P., Unesco, 1980. TEODORESCU, I . , et al. Gospodarirea Apelor. (Water Ed i t u r a CERES, Management) , Bucuresti, Romania, 1973. MAAS, A . - D e s i g n o f Water Resources Systems. Ha r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , Cambridge, 1962

5. Planning Stage 4: Development of Final Project Specifications

Question 21.
The f i n a l s o l u t i o n p a r a m e t e r s were determined using s i m u l a t i o n models, i . e . t h e UNDA model for f l o o d c o n t r o l a s p e c t s and f a c i l i t i e s and t h e w a t e r management b a l a n c e models f o r t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e s t o r a g e capacity of reservoirs for the consuming w a t e r u s e r s . The e x i s t i n g models, prepared i n Romania b e f o r e t h e Mures P r o j e c t , have been improved during the p r o j e c t , as shown w i t h i n Q u e s t i o n

The u s e o f m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l s for final project specifications and 50 needed a b o u t 20 man-months hours e l e c t r o n i c computer t i m e ( I B M 360 and I C L 1 9 0 5 ) . Due t o i t s performances, the model i s r e c o g n i z e d as the model w i t h t h e l a r g e s t a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e development o f p a r a m e t e r s f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l systems.

UNDA

17.

The w a t e r resources - water needs b a l a n c e s i m u l a t i o n m o d e l s a r e a l s o used, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e examined problem, but f o r water resources management p r o b l e m s as r e g a r d s t h e meeting o f users' water needs, the SIMOPT model is largely applied because o f t h e m u l t i p l e a s p e c t s t h a t c a n be a c c o u n t e d f o r and due t o t h e high effectiveness of the

o p t i m i z a t i o n a l g o r i t h m used t h e computer programme.

within

The t r a d e - o f f aspects m e n t i o n e d a t Q u e s t i o n 15.

were

Question 22:
The investments recovery d u r a t i o n , t h e b e n e f i t - c o s t r a t i o and the internal rate of r e t u r n were u s e d as s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l a l t e r n a t i v e comparison.

W e did mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e ana 1 y s i s .

not

make any optimization

The participation of the decision-makers was p r e s e n t e d a t Q u e s t i o n 2 and Q u e s t i o n 15. The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and the development p a t t e r n o f t h e p r o j e c t c o n s t i t u t e d a p r o p e r framework and a favourable premise in preparing alternatives and for the decision-making process. The m u t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g and t h e c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n e x p e r t s and decision-makers may h e l p d e f i n i t e l y t h e development o f the planning water process of mu1 t i p u r p o s e r e s o u r c e s management.

A l l t h e mentioned c r i t e r i a use, as b a s e , t h e b e n e f i t v a l u e s t o be o b t a i n e d by a c h i e v i n g t h e proposed flood control measures and the structural facilites.
Recognizing the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n the estimation of direct and secondary flood damages, multi-criteria analysis is very including sensitivity usef u1 , range v a l u e s o f a analysis for a series of p a r a m e t e r s and f a c t o r s such as the discount rate, hypotheses on t h e r a t e o f economic development i n t h e zone, and t h e s t u d y p e r i o d f o r w h i c h t h e economic e f f i c i e n c y a n a l y s i s i s performed.

Question 25:
Explicit trade-off analyses were n o t made. One had i n view measures and w a s t e w a t e r t r e a t m e n t f a c i l i t i e s o f r e t u r n flows from the users, and t h e i r c o s t s i n o r d e r t o p r o v i d e the r e q u i r e d water quality p a r a m e t e r s were e v a l u a t e d . The minimum a c c e p t a b l e f l o w , i n river bed downstream multiplepurpose storage, c o u l d be p r o v i d e d by t h e t r a n s f e r o f the required amount of water for t h e users l o c a t e d downstream.

Question 23:
We d i d n o t make any p r o p e r r i s k impact a n a l y s i s .

or

For t h e c h o s e n f l o o d s control s o l u t i o n t h e r e were d e t e r m i n e d t h e maximum f l o w s (levels) in the natural r e g i m e and i n t h e d e v e l o p e d r e g i m e ( m o d i f i e d b y works) for the e x c e e d i n g p r o b a b i l i t y o f 5%, 1% and O,l%.

Question 26:
As c o n c e r n s t h e r i v e r b a s i n development impact, i n order to prevent undesired side e f f e c t s , the a minimum a c c e p t a b l e provision of flow, downstream o f the storage dams, was taken i n t o account and s o i l e r o s i o n p r e v e n t i o n measures and w o r k s i n t h e s t o r a g e w a t e r s h e d s were proposed.
The u t i l i s e d m o d e l s h e l p e d t o prepare the a l t e r n a t i v e solutions of r i v e r b a s i n development. The f i n a l solution was e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e decision-makers' and the technicians/experts, taking also into account some add i t i ona 1 information. T h i s was b e c a u s e t h e model i n p u t d a t a ( w a t e r needs, and of potential flood evaluation damages among o t h e r s ) a r e a f f e c t e d by u n c e r t a i n t y .

Question 24:
The f i n a l s o l u t i o n was chosen on t h e e l e m e n t s and i n f o r m a t i o n g i v e n b y t h e a n a l y s i s made a c c o r d i n g t o questions 21 - 23.

Questions 27 and 2 8
As shown i n Q u e s t i o n 15 t h e Permanent E x e c u t i v e Body o r g a n i z e d t h e p r e p a r a t i o n and t h e d e c i s i o n s through the j u s t i f i c a t i on in s t itutes, and specialized presented the solution t o the i nvo 1 ved ministries and for government approval for each structure separately, but taking i n t o account i t s a r t i c u l a t i o n t o t h e framework p l a n . The n e c e s s a r y i n v e s t m e n t f u n d s , m a t e r i a l s and manpower were insured b y t h e a p p r o v a l o f each s o l u t i o n .

The a n a l y s i s was focussed on t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e above-mentioned d i l u t i o n f l o w s upon t h e r e s e r v o i r s o p e r a t i n g regime (behaviour) and upon t h e a c t u a l d e g r e e s o f m e e t i n g q u a n t i t a t i v e w a t e r demands. The demands o b t a i n e d i n t h i s way s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r p e r f o r m i n g comparative analyses of water quality control alternatives for e a c h c o n s i d e r e d zone e . g : waste water t r e a t m e n t a t upstream water u s e r s , d e c r e a s e o f raw w a s t e l o a d i n r e t u r n waters by intervention in technologies at upstream water users, water treatment a t analysed the water users, and i n c r e a s e of d i l u t i o n f l o w s w i t h i n t h e r i v e r beds by an appropriate reservoirs o p e r a t i n g system.

Question 29:
The a n a l y s e s o f m u l t i p u r p o s e w a t e r management i n t h e T i r n a v a H a r e r i v e r b a s i n as w e l l as i n other r i v e r b a s i n s were made i n 1980 when deve 1 opmen t the river bas i n framework schemes were u p - t o - d a t e . I n t h e T i r n a v a Hare r i v e r b a s i n t h e r e w e r e no p r o b l e m s o f w a t e r shortages o r f l o o d damages, i n t h e zones where t h e w a t e r management f a c i l i t i e s were c o m p l e t e d . The p e r i o d i c a l update o f the framework schemes a s s o c i a t e d t o w i t h the f ive-year plans and the e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t documents c o n s t i t u t e s a f a v o u r a b l e framework for the introduction of methodological improvement - when p r o m o t i n g t h e new m u l t i p u r p s e w a t e r management f a c i l i t i e s - a d a p t e d t o t h e d i f f e r e n t s p e c i f i c cases. D u r i n g t h e most r e c e n t y e a r s , within several research works regarding the water resources development p l a n s i n the Tirnava Mare r i v e r s u b b a s i n , s u p p l e m e n t a r y a n a l y s e s were made c o n c e r n i n g some i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n aspects, such as, f o r example, t h e f o l l o w i n g : a. management protection. The n e c e s s a r y d i l u t i o n f l o w s w i t h i n t h e r i v e r beds t o meet t h e required water q u a l i t y standards according t o e x i s t i n g regulations were c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e starting point. Q u a n t it a t i v e water water qual it y

b. Improvement o f w a t e r - e n e r g y t r a d e - o f f i n a t h e r m o power p l a n t An a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d o n the possi b i 1 i t y of d e c r e a s i ng t h e r e c y c l e d amount o f w a t e r w i t h i n a c o o l i n g c i r c u i t by increasing the installed capacity of the water s u p p l y system, taking i n t o account t h e r i v e r f l o w r e g i m e v a r i a t i o n as modif ied by the new proposed reservoirs. The r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d in this way s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r e x a m i n i n g the economic opportuni t y of promoting t h e modernizing o f the w o r k s o f w a t e r s u p p l y system, t a k i n g i n t o account t h e necessary c o s t s in the considered modernizing a l t e r n a t i v e v e r s u s t h e energy saved i n recycling the cooling water.

6. Planning Stage Project Design

Question 30:

5:

The d e s i g n documents (project have been achieved by d e s i gn) s p e c i a l i z e d groups o f the same i n s t i t u t e - ICPGA - involved i n t h e elaboration of the river basin development scheme and i n s u r n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s t a g e s 1 - 4.

-174-

The c o n n e c t i o n between the m u 1 t i p u r pose water management experts and hydrotechnicians e n g i n e e r i ng) experts (hydraul ic became permanent, when t h e two groups were establ i shi ng the functional elements o f the designed structural facilities. Thus, r e l a t e d elements (e.g. t h e w a t e r i n t a k e and t h e s p i l l w a y and o u t l e t facilities of storage reservoirs) had t o b e c o n c e i v e d so t h a t t h e c o u l d take i n t o account the operation rules, t o provide the for achievement of w a t e r management parameters adopted t o j u s t i f y the promotion o f the p r o j e c t . System a n a l y s e s t e c h n i q u e s and p r o c e d u r e s a r e a p p l i e d nowadays on an i n c r e a s i n g s c a l e w i t h i n ICPGA (The R e s e a r c h and D e s i g n I n s t i t u t e f o r Water R e s o u r c e s E n g i n e e r i n g ) and other agencies ( i n s t i t u t e s ) r e l a t e d t o w a t e r f i e l d a c t i v i t y , as w e l l as within the local r i v e r basins a u t h o r i t i e s when p r o m o t i n g t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s systems and e s t a b l i s h i n g their long-term and real-time operation rules. Thus, t h e f o l l o w i n g techniques a r e used i n t h e p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t y t o establish the design parameters o f t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e system:

- the simulation-optimization SIMOPT model (Dima, V i s a n 1980) used i n any k i n d o f scheme c o n f i g u r a t i o n i n order t o analyze t h e multipurpose is water resources systems implemented i n seven b a s i n s and subbasins and w i l l b e p r o g r e s s i v e l y also applied f o r a l l the other r i v e r bas i ns.
Concerning the problem of storage r e s e r v o i r s and r i v e r bed s e d i m e n t a t i o n as w e l l as t h e w a t e r r e g i me i n c l u d i ng qual i t y e u t r o p h i c a t i o n , t h e r e were d e v e l o p e d or are b e i n g experimented w i t h mathematical s i m u l a t i o n models in order t o analyse the reservoir technological and operational characteristics. For a b e t t e r assessment o f the w a t e r r e s o u r c e s systems p e r f o r m a n c e s behaviour (outputs) and the ir p e c u l i a r i t i e s , t h e main p r i n c i p l e s on g l o b a l r e l i a b i l i t y were s t a t e d , t a k i n g i n t o account n o t o n l y t h e hydrological events (a 1 most e x c l u s i v e l y used nowadays) but the stability, functionality and other involved a s p e c t s as w e l l (Dima 1978)

- t h e B l C A D computing programs package ( D u l c u 1978) i s used t o c r e a t e , m a i n t a i n , u p d a t e and o p e r a t e the data base of water use inventory; it i s a p p l i e d nowadays w i t h i n four of the total of nine r i v e r basins: - t h e more s o p h i s t i c a t e d UNDA model (Amaftiesei 1976), a p p l i e d i n the basins, and the almost a l l faster, simplified model, PRAT, applied i n 20% o f t h e r i v e r b a s i n s , a r e used f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l a n a l y s e s ;
- t h e s i m u l a t i o n GRINGO, HOMBRE and ART I ZAN (Amaf t i e s e i 1984) to compute w a t e r models, used r e s o u r c e s - w a t e r demands b a l a n c e , a r e applied i n many r i v e r b a s i n s in accordance w i t h t h e k i n d o f the a n a l y z e d scheme;

The use o f multiobjectivem u l t i c r i t e r i a analysis techniques i s one o f the water management specialists' priorities (Solacolu, C e a c h i r 1978, l o n g u l e s c u , 1 9 8 6 ) . When p r e p a r i n g t h e l o n g - t e r m operating r u l e s i n WRS planning activity as well as for the periodical updating of these r u l e s WRS life period, along the s i m u l a t i o n models (e.g. GRINGO, HOMBRE, ARTIZAN, UNDA, PRAT) and s i m u l a t i o n - o p t i m i z a t i o n models ( i . e . SIMOPR) a r e used. The random f e a t u r e o f most water resources c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as w e l l as o f some w a t e r management requirements o b l i g e us t o achieve i n t h e WRS day b y day o p e r a t i o n s u c h a regime o f s t o r i n g o r d i s c h a r g e water trade-off that allows a rational between the updated long-term o p e r a t i o n r u l e s and t h e s y s t e m ' s momentary (actual) cond i t i ons (Predescu 1 9 8 2 ) .

-175-

The p r e p a r a t i o n o f o p e r a t i n g a decisions i s achieved within continuous iterative analysis feed-back process (Dima, Cadariu, Visan, 1980) w h e r e t h e analysis techniques f o r d e f i n i n g the system's s t a t e p l a y an i m p o r t a n t r o l e . The t e c h n i q u e s used r e f e r to explicit procedures o f c l a s s i c type (abaci, diagrams, preestablished o p e r a t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s ) as w e l l as mathematical mode 1 s se 1 ec t e d to the problem in a c c o r d i ng quest ion. The simulation-optimization ALOC model based on the Out-of-Kilter a l g o r i t h m , i s used t o d e v e l o p t h e m o n t h l y and q u a r t e r l y operating plans o f the multipurpose reservoirs.

The PRAT s i m u l a t i o n model (for the who1 e WRS) and severa 1 s i m u l a t i o n models f o r s e l e c t i n g t h e a dam's best manoeuvres of hydromechanical equipment (Cadariu 1981, V o i n e a 1984) a r e u s e d i n t h e d a y t o day a c t i v i t y d u r i n g f l o o d p e r i ods

Some o f t h e above m e n t i o n e d models a r e d i r e c t l y a p p l i e d by t h e l o c a l WRS o p e r a t i n g u n i t s b y means of their own computers or by t e r m i n a l s connected t o local or regional centers.

A dynamic programming model minimizing the users' operation c o s t s was d e v e l o p e d f o r t h e o p t i m a l a l l o c a t i o n o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s among water users in a river zone ( P a r v u l e s c u 1972)

The s t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t i n Romania o n t h e use m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l l i n g techniques in water resources management p l a n n i n g i s p r e s e n t e d i n a more e x h a u s t i v e manner o r i e n t e d t o the m a i n two c a t e g o r i e s , namely s i m u l a t i o n techniques (Mara, Dima 1981) and o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques (Visan,Dima 1 9 8 0 ) . Ongoing e f f o r t s f o c u s on t h e developments and refinements o f systems analysis techniques, especially mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e ones, aiming t o provide a high-efficiency c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n w a t e r management specialists, systems a n a l y s t s and decision-makers.

R a i n f a l l - r u n o f f models (Serban 1984) are applied for real-time f o r e c a s t i n g o f w a t e r i n f l o w s a t WRS entering points.

References
1. AMAFTIESEI, R. - Programul "UNDA" pentru cal cul ul propagarii viiturilor. (The "UNDA" f l o o d r o u t i n g model and programme), Hidrotehnica, nr.2, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1976.

5 . CRETU, Ghe. - O p t i m i z a r e a s i s t e m e l o r de g o s p o d a r i r e a apelor (Water R e s o u r c e s Systems o p t i m i z a t i o n ) . Edit.FACLA,Timisoara, Tomania, 1980.

2 . AMAFTIESEI, R . - M o d e l u l "ARTIZAN" p e n t r u c a l c u l u l a s i g u r a r i i c u apa a f o l o s i n t e r l o r . A p 1 i c a t i e i n bazh i d r o g r a p h i c O l t . (ARTIZAN -mathe m a t i c a l model f o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e m e e t i n g o f w a t e r demands.

6. DIACON, A.,

e t al. Daily o p t i m i z a t i o n o f power generat i o n i n cascade h y d r o s t y s t e m a s t o c h a s t i c approach, Journal o f Hydrology nr. 51, 1981, Amsterdam.

3.

CHIRIAC, V . , e t a l . - L a c u r i de acumulare (Storage r e s e r v o i r s ) Edit.CERES,Bucuresti,Romania,l976

7.

4. CADARIU, R .

- Model s i p r o g r a m de iniu calcul pentru exploatarea l a c de a c u m u l a r e i n r e g i m e de and comput i ng v i i t u r a . (Model program f o r r e s e r v o i r o p e r a t i o n during floodperiods) Hidrotechnica,nr.7,Bucresti, Romania,lg81.

DIACONU, C. et al. Possibilities for reconstructing to the data corresponding natural hydrological conditions - Casebook o n methods o f computation of quantitative changes in the hydrological regime o f r i v e r b a s i n s due t o human a c t i v i t y . P r o j e c t 5.1 IHP, Unesco, 1980.

8. DIMA,

I. Posibilitati de u t i 1 izare a tehn i c i 1o r de analiza a sistemelor l a studiul lucrarilor de comb a t e r ea inundatiilor (On t h e u s e o f System A n a l y s i s T e c h n i q u e s in Structural Flood Control). 5, B u c u r e s t i , Hidrotehnica, nr. Romani a, 1975.

15.

KING, I . P . ; FILIPKOWSKI, A. The O u t - o f - K i l t e r A l g o r i t h m as a single step method for s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n o f Vistula Planning Alternatives. I n t e r n a t i ona 1 Symposium on ma thema t i c a 1 modelling * n i h y d r o l o g y , Warsaw, 1971.

9.

DIMA,

I.

16. KINDLER, J.
Fiabilitate

( R e l i a b i l i t y ) , Hidrotehnica, n r . 2, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1980.

- The O u t - o f - K i l t e r its A l g o r i t h m and some of a p p l i c a t i o n s i n Water R e s o u r c e s . Symposium f o r w a t e r management p r o b l e m s , Budapest, 1976.

10. DIMA,

I . ; CADARIU, R . ; VISAN, V . Graf i c de exploatare

17. LAZARESCU, F . ;

(Operation pol icy f o r water resources system), Hidrotehnica nr. 5, (Enciclopedi apelor), B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1980.

1 1 . DIMA,

I . ; VISAN, V. Model d e simulare-optimizare - S I MOPTpentru analiza parametrilor de gospodarire a sistemelor mu1 t i p l e apelor cu scopuri (S I MOPT simulation
'

STEGAROIU, P. Planul d e a m e n a j a r e complexa a b a z i n u l u i Muresul S u p e r i o r (The Upper Mures river basin m u l t i p u r p o s e development p l a n ) . Hidrotehnica, nr. 3, B u c u r e s t i , Romani a, 1978.
OIMA, 1 . - Simulare (Simulation). Hidrotehnica, nr. 7, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1982.

18. MARA, L . :

o p t i m i z a t i o n model f o r t h e s t u d y of technical parametres of m u l t i p u r p o s e water management systems), H i d r o t e h n i c a , n r . 10, B u c r e s t i , Romania, 1981. 12.DULCU, G. - L'emploi de l a banque de donnees pour l ' a m nagement de de c o u r s d ' e a u XV i ernes journees de l ' h y d r a u l i q u e , Toulouse, France,

19. PARVULESCU,

C. - Optimizarea r e p a r t i t i e i r e s u r s e l o r de apa for o p t imal (Techn i q u e s a l l o c a t i o n of water resources), S t u d i i d e economia a p e l o r , v o l . I O B u c u r e s t i , 1972.

20.

1978.
13. HORTOPAN,
I., et al. Gospodarirea Apelor. Manua 1 pentru scol i tehnice (Water for management; Handbook technicians). Edit. Oidactica si pedagogica, B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1965.

PREDESCU, C. - Utilizarea in graf i c e l o r d i specer lacuri lor de exp 1 oa t a r e a acumulare (Use of long-term operating rules in storage reservoirs current operation) 5, B u c u r e s t i , Hidrotehnica, nr. Romania, 1982.

21.

1 4 . IORGULESCU,

FI. I n problema deciziilor rnulticriteriale (On mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e deci s ions the problems). H i d r o t e c h n i c a , nr.6, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1986. w a t e r

SOLACOLU, P.; CEACHIR, 0. Optimizarea solutiilor de amenajare complexa a a p e l o r i n comparat i i 1 o r cazu 1 pluricriteriale (Multiobjective technique for ana 1 y s e s optimization of multipurpose water resources development alternatives) Hidrotehnica, nr. 2, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1979.

-177-

2 2 . SOLACOLU,

P. et al. - cu pr i v i r e la j u s t if i carea econornica a investitiilor in lucrarile de combater e a inundati i l o r (On t h e e c o n o m i c a l justification of investment costs in structural flood control),Hidrotehnica, nr. 1 , B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1982.
AL. - Mathematical STANESCU,V. model for the f 1 oodwaves estimation. Meteorology and Hydrology, n r . 2. I n s t i t u t e of Meteorology and Hydrology, B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1974.

28.

VISAN, V.; DIMA, I. Optimizare (Optimization) 11, Hidrotehnica, nr. B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1981.

23.

29. V O I N E A , B. - Metoda de c a l c u l aprioric a1 manevrelor la echipamentele hidromecanice ale barajelor i n p e r i o a d a d e ape mari. (Method f o r t h e a p r i o r i computing o f o p e r a t i n g schedule hydromechanic for dams ' equ i pments d u r i ng f 1 oods) nr 10, Hidrotehnica, B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1984.

24. STEGAROIU, P . - R e s u r s e l e de apa u t i l i z a b i l e a l e r i u r i l o r inter ioare (avai l a b l e water resources o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v ers) Hidrotechnica nr. 11, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1982. 25. S E R B A N ,

30. X X X - Stochastic optimization and s i m u l a t i o n techniques for management o f regional water r e s o u r c e s systems. Texas Water USA, 1971, Development B o a r d , 1972-

P.

31. X X X
Compunerea

uti 1 izind mode 1 e vi iturilor matematice ploaie-scurgere (Rainfall-runoof mathematical mode 1 s for flood waves nr. composition), Hidrotehnica, 12. B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1984.

- Guideline E v a l u a t i o n , UNIDO, 1972

for Project UN, New Y o r k ,

2 6 . TEODORESCU, et al. Gospodarirea Apelor (Water Management) , Edi t u r a CERES, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1973.

27

UMBRESI, Al., BURCEA, M. MEREUTA, D. - Conceptii s i metode p r i v i n d p r a c t i c a r e a b a l apei s i a p i r g h i i l o r economice pentru valorificarea superioara a resurselor de apa ( c o n c e p t s and methods r e l a t e d t o t h e p r a c t i c e o f w a t e r management b a l a n c e and o f economic tools for the better u t i l i z a t i o n of water resources) Appl i ed Cybernetics E d i t u r a Academiei R.S.R., Bucuresti, Romania,

1985.

-179-

APPLICATION OF SIMULATION TECHNIQUES IN WATER RESOURCES PLANNING IN THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

Alfred Becker und Dieter Kozerski lnstitut fur Wasserwirtschaft. DDR-1190 Berlin Schnellerstr. 140, GDR

1. Increasing Complexity Water Management

in

The d e v e l o p m e n t s i n the last decade h a v e i n p a r t i c u l a r shown t h a t i t becomes more a n d more d i f f i c u l t i n a l l parts of the world

a c c e p t a b l e s o l u t i o n s can be found i n more and more c a s e s o n l y b y t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of mathematical models and advanced s y s tem ana 1 ys i s techniques. (Cohon and Marks 1975, Haimes et al. 1975, H a i t h and L o u c k s 1976, M a j o r 1 9 7 7 ) . T h i s paper is related to p r o b l e m s as m e n t i o n e d above, i . e . t o multiobjective optimization of w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management i n r i v e r b a s i n s r e g a r d i n g m u l t i p u r p o s e water usage and r e s e r v o i r c o n t r o l a s p e c t s , with special regard to water quantity.

to satisfy municipal, agricultural and industrial w a t e r demands i n t h e r e q u i r e d q u a n t i t y and/or q u a l i t y t o protect water against p o l l u t i o n t o provide a protection. resources

suff cient

flood

The number and v a r e t y o f w a t e r u s e r s and o f p o l u t i o n s o u r c e s a r e s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s ng and so a r e t h e for a higher requirements supply r e 1 i a b i 1 i t y of w a t e r (in q u a n t i t y and qua i t y ) as w e l l as f o r flood protection. I n many cases c o n f l i c t i n g p r o b lems a r i s e w h i c h c a n be s o l v e d o n l y by a c e n t r a l i z e d p l a n n i n g o f appropr i a t e measures f o r r a t i o n a l use o f t h e a v a i l a b l e water r e s o u r c e s such as r e s e r v o i r s , w a t e r t r a n s f e r chann e l s o r p i p e s , waste water t r e a t m e n t p l a n t s , l e v e e systems e t c . As these p l a n n i n g procedures have t o consider problems and arising from the conf 1 i c t s increasing complexity of water resources systems management,

2. The Special Importance of Simulation Techniques in Water Resources Project Planning in Complex River Basins
I n the selection o f a modelling approach or systems analysis technique f o r the solution of the b e f o r e - m e n t i o n e d p r o b l e m s two b a s i c q u e s t i o n s h a v e t o b e answered: (a) I s a d i r e c t o p t i m i z a t i o n d e s i r e d o r a r e t h e t r a d e - o f f s of p r i m a r y i n t e r e s t w h i c h r e s u l t from different planning and control strategies? (b) Should t h e a n a l y s i s be based on s e l e c t e d c r i t i c a l p e r i o d s , e.g. on observed h i s t o r i c a l low or on sets of f l o w periods, generated longer time s e r i e s o f t h e hydrological state variables expected i n t h e p l a n n i n g p e r i o d ?

A c c o r d i ng to international developments there i s a declining t r e n d i n t h e GDR i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f d i r e c t o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques (question a), and p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s based o n s e l e c t e d c r i t i c a l periods ( q u e s t i o n b) a r e o n l y a c c e p t e d as a p r e - i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f more complex modelling projects, or in cases where t h e m o d e l l i n g approach cannot b e a p p l i e d (because o f a lack of time,research capacity....). This means t h a t s i m u l a t i o n techniques using sets o f generated time s e r i e s of hydrological input variables are GDR, generally preferred i n the particularly for the derivation of optimum d e s i g n alternatives and optimum control strategies for m u l t i p u r p o s e r e s e r v o i r systems. The m a i n r e a s o n s a r e : (1) In most cases d ir e c t optimization techniques (linear, dynamic programming e t c .) can be applied efficiently on1 y for determined selected reference conditions (e.g. an o b s e r v e d or given c r i t i c a l period). This leads immediately t o t h e question for the optimum s o l u t i o n i n o t h e r more o r l e s s critical periods (see e.g. S h i a o and M c S p a r r a n 1 9 1 1 ) . As a r e s u l t o f a p p l i c a t i o n s o f d i r e c t o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques i n t h e GDR, e . g . t o determir,e an economical o p t i mum structure of a water d i s t r i b u t i o n system (Forner e t al. 1980) o r t o o p t i m i z e t h e control strategy of single reservoirs (Schramm 1981) , i t turned out t h a t the calculated o p t i m u m s e r v e d o q l y as an orientation while political, territorial and water management a s p e c t s were t a k e n as the main factors in decision-making (sufficient r e l i a b i l i t y of water supply for main users, etc.). Similar e x p e r i e n c e has b e e n made i n the application of u t i l i t y t h e o r y , w h i c h i s based on a u n i f i e d e v a l u a t i o n o f a l l a s p e c t s t o be c o n s i d e r e d in

the optimization (social, political, environmental, etc.) (Keeney e t a l . 1976). The a p p l i c a t i o n o f explicit stochastic o p t i m i za t i o n techniques leads t o s e r i o u s problems in the case o f systems with severa 1 r e s e r v o i r s , and t h e c h a n c e c o n s t r a i n e d - programming does not f u l f i l l a l l requirements (Palmer e t a l . 1979). The GDR i s one o f t h e European where water c o u n t r i es resources are relatively s c a r c e and i n m u l t i p l e use (Dyck e t a l . 1980). Low f l o w and f l o o d f l o w p e r i o d s o c c u r subsequently with typical persistency and cluster effects: subsequent 1 o n g e r 1 ow f 1 ow periods with significant deficiences i n water supply f o r a number o f w a t e r u s e r s sequences of major dangerous f l o o d s . and

cont r o1 Theref o r e the strategies, especially for larger reservoirs, have t o take simultaneously into consideration the maximum p o s s i b l e recharge o f water f o r low f l o o d p e r i o d s and a l s o t h e requirements of flood p r o t e c t ion for dangerous f l o o d s which can occur i n t h e same p e r i o d . T h a t means t h a t low f l o w p e r i o d s and f l o o d s have t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e a simulation process in realistic manner c o n c e r n i n g their time structure, m a g n i t u d e , sequence, e t c . Water r e s o u r c e s e n g i n e e r s and decision-makers i n t h e GDR have e x p r e s s e d t h e i r p r i mary interest i n r e s u l t s on t h e efficiency of cons i d e r e d planning and control strategies. This especially concerns information on trade-offs i n the r e l i a b i l i t y figures for a l l water users,

-181-

h y d r o 1 o g i ca 1 in c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on t h e f l o o d regime, i n water q u a l i t y e t c . Preferred is information in f orm of probability distribticn functions, cumulatve frequencies, e t c . (6)

J(

I nf o r m a t i o n on econom i c f rom effects obtained cost-benefitana 1 y s e s , cost-and-damage-analyses etc. is appreciated and often r e q u e s t e d as a supplement, b u t i t i s n e v e r t a k e n as t h e o n l y b a s i s i n decision-making.

The s i m u l a t i o n a l g o r i t h m s o f t h e models are clear and understandable f o r t h e model users and the complex c o n d i t i o n s o f water resources in use and management e x t e n s i v e l y used r i v e r b a s i n s can be represented more realistically than in applications of direct o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques. The r e s u l t s p r o v i d e d b y t h e model clearly reflect the effects of a given control measure ( d e c i s i o n a l t e r n a t i v e ) . The confidence of the d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s i n t h e model i s p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n f i r m e d by t h e f a c t that results obtained f o r simple decision alternatives meet t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . There is no a priori restriction of the decision r a n g e b e c a u s e t h e model d o e s not require preselected criteria for the computation (e.g. a dis t in c t o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n o r assumptions o f the decision-maker on p r e f e r e n c e It structures etc) enables t h e decision-maker to extend step-by-step the desired information on the system behaviour, the efficiency o f new w a t e r s t r u c t u r e s , changed control strategies, the trade-offs, etc. according to the progress of the simulation.

The a s p e c t s m e n t i o n e d under (2) , (4) (5) and (6) have particularly i n i t ia t e d the d e v e 1 opmen t of an efficient computerized long-term simulation t e c h n i q u e (Schramm 1975) w h i c h is based on t h e Monte-Carlo-method s i m i l n r t o t h a t i n t r o d u c e d b y Thomas and F i e r i n g ( 1 9 6 2 ) , S v a n i d z e ( 1 9 8 4 ) , It H u f s c h m i d t and F i e r i n g (1966). uses s y n t h e t i c time series of the hydrological input variables, allows for a computation of numerous p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s and p r o v i des comprehensive information to support decision-making. I n the f o l l o w i n g some special features of the above-mentioned s i m u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e are briefly reported and some important r e s u l t s and a p p l i c a t i o n experiences presented. the For about one t h i r d o f t e r r i t o r y of t h e GDR individual r i v e r b a s i n models o f t h a t t y p e w e r e i n t r o d u c e d and h a v e been r e g u l a r l y a p p l i e d f o r long-term balancing o f w a t e r demands and a v a i l a b l e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s and t o select optimum long-term planning and control strategies for the river basin system (Gruenewald e t a l . 1977, Becker e t a l . 1978, R i e c h e r t e t a l . 1979, B o t h , K o t e r s k i 1980, D i e t z , 1981, Boehme 1980, Lehmann e t a l . Schramm 1981). The successful application of the d e v e 1 oped simulation technique may be e x p l a i n e d p r i m a r i l y as f o l l o w s :

The i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d c a n b e u s e d a l s o as a basis for a collective decision-making which i n c l u d e s w a t e r u s e r s and other interested authorities. These conclusions are c o n f i r m e d by a publication of K i nd 1 e r (1981) in which he i1 lustrates the step-by-step p r o g r e s s i n an i n t e r a c t i v e c o m p u t e r aided d e c i s i o n procedure r e f e r r i n g t o a d e f i n i t e selected hydrological situation.

-182-

Short Summary of Characteristics of the Advanced Version of the Simulation Model

The simulation technique mentioned before has been s y s t e m a t i c a l l y improved d u r i n g t h e l a s t years. The m a i n o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s r e s e a r c h work was t o s e t u p a p r o g r a m s y s t e m w h i c h c a n e a s i l y be a d a p t e d t o any g i v e n r i v e r b a s i n and which a l l o w s f o r a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f
3 :

3.

(A)

t h e s t o c h a s t i c s i m u l a t i o n model for the hydrological input c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which d e f i n e the a v a i l a b l e water resources the deterministic water management model w h i c h s i m u l a t e s strategies of water g iv e n allocation, reservoir operation etc. i n t h e r i v e r b a s i n , and provides the r e g i s t r a t i o n of water supply deficiencies, resulting damages and o t h e r state conditions o f interest for the final s t a t i s t i ca 1 eva 1 u a t i on. is for the the model

(B)

v a r i o u s p l a n n i n g and management alternatives d i f f e r e n t w a t e r demand f i g u r e s ( i n c l u d i n g seasonal v a r i a t i o n s or trends over a longer planning period) long observed o r s y n t h e t i c series o f hydrological input variables characterizing the availa b l e s u r f a c e water resources.

fc

An a d d i t i o n a l component

(C)

J :

the program representation output data.

of

The advanced v e r s i o n o f the p r o g r a m s y s t e m has self-adapting f e a t u r e s so t h a t w i t h i n a s i n g l e computer run the specific sub-programs and a l g o r i t h m s f o r a given r i v e r basin are automatically generated according t o the s p e c i f i c input data (Kozerski 1981). The program f a c i l i t a t e s (1) t h e t r e a t m e n t o f any g i v e n r i v e r system the investigation of different s y s t e m s t r u c t u r e s and c o n t r o l strategies or as

The l a s t m e n t i o n e d p r o g r a m and t h e d a t a d i s p a t c h i n g p r o c e d u r e were special designed on t h e b a s i s of data identification, c h e c k i n g and preprocessing procedures which e n a b l e any g i v e n r i v e r b a s i n s y s t e m ( o r system s t r u c t u r e ) t o be m o d e l l e d by simple i n p u t d a t a s p e c i f i c a t i o n ( i n s t e a d o f s o f t w a r e d e v e l o p m e n t as r e q u i r e d i n p r e v i o u s models.) I t should be mentioned that those p r i n c i p l e s a r e on-I i n e w i t h r e c e n t i n t e r n a t i o n a l trends. Other e s s e n t i a l principles t h e program d e v e l o p m e n t were: (1) in

(2)

(3) t h e o p t i o n a l use o f o b s e r v e d
synthetic time series hydrological input variables

(4) t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n
of representing resul ts.

of the form the simulation

The b a s i c components o f the advanced program, their i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n s and i n t e g r a t i o n i n t h e d e c i s i o n process a r e represented 1. i n a general form i n Fig. Supplementary informat ion on i m p o r t a n t measures c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e p l a n n i n g process i s g i v e n i n Fig.2. Main p a r t s o f t h e program a r e :

The deterministic water management model (B) was completely separated from the s t o c h a s t i c s i m u l a t i o n model ( A ) , which g e n e r a t e s intercorrelated time series of the required hydrological input variables of (e.g. monthly averages streamf low). These input v a r i a b l e s a r e s t o r e d on m a g n e t i c t a p e and can b e r e a d i n t o t h e main s t o r a g e f o r each a c t u a l computation. general i z a t i o n of the d e t e r m i n i s t i c w a t e r management model (B) which simulates t h e processes o f water allocation, u t i l i z a t i o n and management i n a r i v e r basin, including reservoir o p e r a t i o n , was a c h i e v e d by means

(2) The

-183-

o f t y p i f i e d algorithms for the various operations occurring i n t h e system.

(3)

The p r og r am for the representation of the c o m p u t z t i o n r e s u l t s (C) was a l s o g e n e r a l i z e d w i t h r e g a r d t o two forms o f d a t a lists (tables) p r i n t e d b y t h e computer.

Because i t i s t h e p e r f o r m a n c e features (general applicability, flexibility, etc.) t h a t makes t h e advanced model v e r s i o n a t t r a c t i v e for practical application, some essential d e t a i l s w i l l be d e s c r i b e d b r i e f l y i n a l a t e r chapter.

4. Assessment of the Available Water Resources and Hydrological Input Characteristics for the Planning of Water Resources Systems Management
I t i s q u i t e obvious t h a t t h e reliability of the hydrological i n f o r m a t i o n used i n t h e p l a n n i n g process i s e x t r e m e l y e s s e n t i a l for the reliability of the r e s u l t s . Errors i n the hydrological input information w i l l affect a l l subsequent steps o f t h e planning process and can l e a d t o i n a d e q u a t e d e c i s i o n s (wrong design o f new s t r u c t u r e s etc.). Thus new o r i e n t a t i o n s are needed during the International H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme f o r future r e s e a r c h ir, t h i s f i e l d due t o t h e following general problems in hydrology: (i) The h y d r o l o g i c a l systems a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y a f f e c t e d b y human i n f l u e n c e s . Hence, i n f o r m a t i o n on the available water r e s o u r c e s and o n t h e h y d r o l o g ical regime derived f rom data ser ies ex i s t i ng cannot be s i m p l y e x t r a p o l a t e d i n t o the planning periods t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d .

Therefore i t w i l l become more and more n e c e s s a r y t o compute t h e ava l a b l e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s b y means of hydrological models o f river bas ns f r o m m e t e o r o l o g i c a l input fields (precipitation, evapotranspiration) taking into account the effects o f expected c l i m a t i c changes ( t r e n d s , e t c . ) . As generalized techniques f o r s u c h an approach were not a v a i l a b l e t h e approved s i m u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e based on t h e Monte-Carlo-principle as i n t r o d u c e d b y Schramm (1975) was a p p l i ed I t generates time series of intercorreiated hydrological input characteristics o f any d e s i r e d l e n g t h , e.g. 20 s e t s of 50-year records o f monthly r i v e r discharges, as s t o c h a s t i c, multidimensional, unsteady , t r a n s f o r m e d normal distributed of higher order Markov-process (Schramm 1975). I n some c o u n t r i e s t h e a p p r o a c h was a r g u e d a g a i n s t as f o l l o w s : the generated time s e r i e s cannot supply more information than the shorter o b s e r v e d ones w h i c h a r e t a k e n as t h e basis f o r the synthetic generation; observed s i n g l e extreme events a r e inadmissably extrapolated i n t o the p l a n n i n g h o r i z o n ; t h e r e f o r e t h e use of t h e observed r e c o r d s f o r the p l a n n i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n seems t o be the best solution. As reply to t h e s e a r g u m e n t s t h e f o l l o w i n g may b e said: Probability d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f the hydrological, water resources related variables, e.g. river discharges, have t o b e based on s u f f i c i e n t l y large data sets in all r a n g e s t o be c o n s i d e r e d . This is o n l y guaranteed if 1o n g e r time s e r i es are available.

( i i ) Long-term c l imatic changes m o d i f i e d by i n c r e a s i n g human impacts can a l s o i n f l u e n c e t h e availability of the water resources.

(2) The a p p l i c a t i o n of the multidimensional generation technique ensures that the in the information involved longest observed records o f the r i v e r b a s i n under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s generalized. In addition t o this the empirical d i s t r i b u t i o n

functions and t h o s e received from t h e g e n e r a t e d t i m e s e r i es c a n b e c r i t i c a l l y r e v i e w e d and compared w i t h t h o s e d e r i v e d f r o m available long records o f other i n order to avoid stations, errors of t h e abcve-mentioned character.

prof i le) This vector i s then also used as a "downstream operator" wh i c h o r g a n i zes a downstream c o m p u t a t i o n b y means = of the simple operation K '

NEXT(K)

(3) Long g e n e r a t e d

t i m e s e r i e s of discharges which adequately r e f l e c t the s t a t i s t i c s o f the real process include a larger variety of c r i t i c a l events o r sequences of such events (deficiency periods, floods, etc.) than t h e observed records.

(b) A c c o r d i n g l y a generalized a l l w a t e r uses d e s c r i p t i o n for was i n t r o d u c e d w h i c h a l l o w s one t o s p e c i f y (see T a b l e 2 and F i g . 5) :

1':

the 1ocat ion of water w i t h d r a w a l (PE) and r e t u r n f l o w (PR) the r e l a t e d q u a n t i t i e s (E, R) as constant or seasonally v a r y i n g v a l u e s (e.g. m o n t h l y ) . p r e f e r e n c e numbers (Z) d e f i n i n g the a p r i o r i t y sequence o f preference users (sma 1 1 e r number denotes h i gher priority)

9 :

The w i d e p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e approved s i m u l a t i o n technique has c o n f i r m e d i t s p r a c t i c a l e f f i c i e n c :y

.
J;

5. Advanced Version Simulation Technique

of

the

The b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s o f the advanced v e r s i o n o f the simulation model f o r water r e s o u r c e s systems management w h i c h may b e a p p l i e d a l s o f o r o t h e r purposes a r e d e s c r i b e d in another p u b l i c a t i o n (Kozerski 1981). H e r e o n l y a s h o r t summary s h o u l d b e given: (a) To d e s c r i b e t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f a given river network a1 1 balance points and system elements along the rivers ( l o c a t i o n o f water withdrawals and r e l e a s e s , of reservoirs, etc.) a r e denoted by decimal 3 and c o l . 1 numbers (see F i g . of Table 1). This notation a l l o w s one t o r e f e r to any existing river s y s tem c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and t o include or exclude intermediate balance p o i n t s w i t h o u t any r e d e n o t i n g o f For internal other points. purposes o f t h e computer program I S the decimal notat ion automatically transformed into a n i n t e g e r n u m e r a t i o n (see T a b l e 1). For each b a l a n c e p o i n t t h e n e x t downstream b a l a n c e p o i n t i s t h e network s p e c i f i e d so t h a t configuration is entirely d e f i n e d by t h e s i n g l e v e c t o r NEXT (K) : ( N E X T ( K ) = 999 characterizes the closing

(c) The p r o c e s s o f w a t e r resources u t i l i z a t i o n and management is simulated i n each c o m p u t a t i o n a l s t e p as f o l l o w s :

- Reading

of the required hydrological input variables (e.g. uninfluenced discharges) from a d a t a s t o r a g e u n i t .

- Allocaticn

o f water to all u s e r s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r demand the available and p r i o r i t y , water resources and the r e 1ease of water from r e s e r v o i r s , i f necessary. Calculation o f the resulting s t a t e c o n d i t i o n s ( a c t u a l water supply, reduced discharges, actual reservo ir storages, etc.)

- Registration

of these state variables (cumulative counting) according t o a specified l i s t o f p r e s e l e c t e d v a r i a b l e s and events t o be analysed.

Water w i t h d a w a l and r e t u r n f l o w may b e l o c a t e d a t t h e same N 204 i n b a l a n c e p o i n t (e.g. 3) o r a t d i f f e r e n t ones Fig.

-185-

(e.g. N 102). A user can be subdivided i n t o several user elements ( p o r t i o n s o f water use of different importance which are specified by different preference numbers, e.g. N 103 i n t o t h e s p l i t t i n g of N 103.1 the elements so-called b a s i c demand with preference number 50 - and N 103.2 t h e r e s i d u a l demand w i t h p r e f e r e n c e number 180). The sequence o f users i n the I S allocation procedure c o n t r o l l e d i n each t i m e s t e p b y ( f rom t h e p r e f e r e n c e numbers smaller t o h i g h e r ones), e.g. t h e system o f users g i v e n in Table 1 i s computed i n the following sequence: N 103.1, N 305, N 102, N 103.2, N 204.

procedure (as e . g . smaller q u a n t i t i e s o f water withdrawals i n case o f exceedence o f a g i v e n l i m i t discharge, e t c . ) . The d e s i r e d f l e x i b i l i t y and simplicity of the data output p r o g r a m was a n a l o g o u s l y a c h i e v e d b y defining two basic types of r e g i s t r a t i on: type 1

- r e g i s t r a t i o n o f any d e s i r e d variables (e.g. d i s c h a r g e s a t balance,points,withdrawa l s o f u s e r s , e t c . ) and o u t put o f p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f exceedence o f d e f i n i t e d i s charges i n t h e form o f d a t a l i s t s a s shown i n T a b l e 3.

type 2

(d) R e s e r v o i r s c a n be d e s c r i bed analogously i n t h e i r location, capacity, c o n s e r v a t i o n volume, f l o o d c o n t r o l volume, e t c . The use o f t h e r e s e r v o i r s f o r water s u p p l y i s s p e c i f i e d by " r e l e a s e elements", w h i c h a l s o have a preference number. Here a number Z = 100 means t h a t f r o m t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g r e s e r v o i r zone water releases a r e allowed f o r a l l users of higher p r i o r i t y ( i n Table 2 those are N 102, N 103.2, N 2 0 4 ) . Thus, b y means o f a few d a t a m a n i f o l d r e s e r v o i r - u s e r r e l a t i o n s can be described including subdivision of the reservoirs into I f t h e computed sub-zones. storage volume exceeds the c o n s e r v a t i o n zone volume t h e n i n c r e a s e d r e l e a s e s a r e computed according t o the capacity of the river bed downstream o f the reservoir. A n o t h e r f a c i l i t y o f t h e computer program (optional avai l a b l e ) enables t h e user t o integrate s p e c i f i c algorithms (so-called "dynamic elements") which a r e not covered by t h e s t a n d a r d e l e m e n t s o f t h e advanced model (including c a l l s of external subprograms i n F O R T R A N o r A L G O L , and t o c o n s i d e r s t a t e d e p e n d e n t m o d i f i c a t i o n s of the a l l o c a t i o n

r e g i s t r a t i o n of the f i r s t m o n t h and o f t h e d u r a t i o n of the c r i t i c a l events or conditions (e.g. duration of exceedence o f g iv e n l i m i t discharges, duration of definite deficiencies i n water supply etc.) and output of the data l i s t s .

An e x a m p l e o f a t y p e 1 - o u t p u t f o r a lowland r i v e r i n t h e GDR is shown i n T a b l e 3 ( p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f exceedence o f t h e d i s c h a r g e s listed in column 1 o f T a b l e 3 ) . The t y p i c a l seasonal variation of the discharges can be c l e a r l y seen. While the discharge in February always exceeds 19 m3/s (100% probabi 1 i t y of exceedence) the m o n t h l y d i s c h a r g e i n August i s w i t h i n t h e i n v e s t i g a t e d 100 y e a r s p e r i o d t w e n t y t i m e s b e l o w 1 m3/s ( o n l y 80% p r o b a b i l i t y o f exceedence) .A m o n t h l y minimum discharge o f e . g . 6 m3/s c a n b e g u a r a n t e e d h e r e o n l y b y means o f additional reservoirs or water transfers or , when t h e smal 1 summer d i s c h a r g e s a r e c a u s e d e . g . by irrigation water losses by modifying the allocation strategy or by changing the p r i o r i t i e s . The outprint of similar probability l i s t s can be s p e c i f i e d f o r w a t e r SUPPI Y deficiencies of any water user of interest, for storage volumes in reservoirs etc., as w e l l as for durations o f c r i t i c a l periods (type 2 ) .

These t a b l e s a r e d i r e c t l y u s e d decision-making or f o r p l o t t i n g to i l l u s t r a t e the trade-offs of c o n f l i c t i n g objectives as i n Fig. 4. Fig. 4 was d e r i v e d i n an i nves t i g a t i on for the ear 1 i e r Rappbode r e s e r v o i r system w i t h a 108 H i o m 3 t o t a l s t o r a g e volume of (Becker e t a l . 1978). for The u p p e r p a r t o f the f i g u r e the illustrates t h e decrease of r e l i a b i l i t y o f d r i n k i n g water supply with increasing drinking water withdrawal. it is further remarkable t h a t t h i s decrease is i f the d r i n k i n g water much s m a l l e r s u p p l y has a h i g h e r p r i o r i t y than the release o f r e s e r v o i r water f o r l o w f l o w a u g m e n t a t i o n (Curve 1)

observed f l o o d s . These were t h e n used t o c a l c u l a t e d a i l y f l o o d f l o w s i n months t h e g e n e r a t e d mean f l o w o f w h i c h was i d e n t i f i e d as influenced bv a f l o o d . The D a r t i c u l a r f l o o d f!ow p a t t e r n was s e l e c t e d by a random e x p e r i m e n t ( u r n e x p e r i m e n t ) .

A result obtained by the t h i s technique f o r a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e Saale r e s e r v c i r s y s t e m i s shown i n Fig. 5 . I t indicates that

is an i n c r e a s e d f l o o d r i s k givep d u r i n g February, March and A p r i l , d e s p i t e an i n c r e a s e o f t h e f l o o d c o n t r o l volume by 15 M i o m 3 f r o m November u n t i l i n Curve A March, as shown ( f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e s of t h e f l o o d control volume cannot be of the accepted because decreasing re1 iabi 1 i t i e s of water supplies during the summer).
an e f f i c i e n t r e l e a s e s t r a t e g y for t h e f l o o d c o n t r o l volume b e f o r e and i m m e t i i a t e l y a f t e r a f l o o d can remarkably reduce t h e f l o o d r i s k from F e b r u a r y u n t i l A p r i l (Curve B i n s t e a d o f C in 5). Fig.

T h e - lower p a r t of Fig. 4 illustrates t h e decrease of the r e l i a b i l i t y o f d r i n k i n g water supply w i t h i n c r e a s i n g f l o o d c o n t r o l volume 1) and the according (Curve d e c r e a s e s i n f l o o d r i s k (Curve 2 ) . On t h e b a s i s o f Fig. 4a the reservoir c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y for s y s t e m was f i n a l l y d e f i n e d w h i c h i s accepted by a1 1 interested a u t h o r i t i e s and w h i c h i n t h i s sense r e p r e s e n t s an optimum.

6. Simulation of Floods for the Consideration and Planning of Flood Protection

The m o s t d a n g e r o u s phases o f floods often occur d u r i n g a few in d a y s or e v e n h o u r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y small and medium m o u n t a i n o u s r i v e r basins. Therefore a simulation model w h i c h w o r k s o n a m o n t h l y b a s i s cannot adequately take account of the real flood risk (peak flows, inundation etc.) and duration of other a p p r o a c h e s have t o b e a p p l i e d for flood investigations. After a first attempt o f d i s t r i b u t i n g d a i l y f l o w s around t h e generated monthly mean f l o w b y means o f s i m p l e a v e r a g e d i s t r i b u t i o n functions {Krippendorf, Schramm 1970) the f o l lowing t e c h n i q u e was d e v e l o p e d and a p p l i e d ( B e c k e r , K o z e r s k i 1976). Typical dimensionless flood hydrograph p a t t e r n s ( d a i l y flows) were d e r i v e d from a l a r g e r number o f

As n e x t s t e p a stochastic simulation technique f o r the d i r e c t generation of d a i l y flood flows w i t h i n a l o n g - t e r m s i m u l a t i o n model has been d e v e l o p e d and applied 1977). This (Gruenewald e t a l . technique i s described i n a s p e c i a l paper (Becker e t a l . 1979). The r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e lower p a r t o f 4 is a r e s u l t of the Fig. application of this technique f o r t h e Rappbode r e s e r v o i r system.
I n cases o f s e p a r a t e p l a n n i n g of f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n measures, i . e . w i t h o u t simultaneous consideration of water s u p p l y problems, a s e p a r a t e s i m u l a t i o n of s i n g l e f l o o d events i s acceptable. An example of a p p l i c a t i o n where a b o u t 300 f l o o d from h y d r o g r a p h s were c a l c u l a t e d synthetical l y generated 2-hour-rainfall d a t a b y means o f deterministic r i v e r b a s i n models i s also d e s c r i bed in the a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d p u b l i c a t i o n (Becker et al. 1 9 7 9 ) . One r e s u l t o f t h i s

-187-

a p p l i c a t i o n (Fig. 6) shows t h a t t h e r e d u c t i o n o f f l o o d peak f l o w b y an uncontrolled reservoir i s strongly discharge dependent, and that a therefore the investigation of selected flood (e.g. a design flood) i s not appropriate. The r e s u l t s c a n n o t be e x t r a p o l a t e d t o other f l o o d events. This underlines the necessity of i n v e s t i g a t i n g a l a r g e number o f events, o f generated time s e r i e s o f streamflows etc. as e x p l a i n e d i n Chapter 4 .

References
U. B e c k e r , A . ; G o s , E ; Gruerlewald, Multi-site simulation (1979) : of f l o o d f l o w f o r d e s i g n i n g and reservoir systems. operating on S p e c i f i c Aspects Int. Sym o f H y d r o l o g i c a l Computations f o r Water Projects. Unesco, Leningrad, Sept. 1979.

7 . Conclusions
For t h e p l a n n i n g of water resources systems design and of management the appl i c a t i o n simulation techniques which use s t o c h a s t i c a l l y generated t i m e s e r i e s o f water resources c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n a d e t e r m i n i s t i c water management model has been w i d e l y a c c e p t e d . The advanced v e r s i o n o f t h i s type of model c a n e a s i l y be a d a p t e d t o a river basin by data g iv e n I S s p e c i f i c a t i o n alone. This a c c o m p l i s h e d t h r o u g h a u t o m a t i c gener a t i o n of the specific subprograms f o r t h e r i v e r b a s i n t o be m o d e l l e d . To f a c i l i t a t e t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f a s e r i e s o f management a l t e r n a t i v e s (typically differing in a few numer i c a 1 parameters from one another) the computer program package a l l o w s f o r an easy input d a t a m o d i f i c a t i o n which a v o i d s t h e repeated i n p u t o f a large number I t can b e s a i d t h a t o f d a t a cards. t h e model i s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e f o r practical application. The f l e x i b i l i t y and s i m p l i c i t y of t h e advanced model and t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f the computations are provided in the form of probability distributions of se 1 ec t e d water resources c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r a l l months o f the year (e.g. p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f exceedence of given limit discharges, supply deficiencies e t c . ) a r e considered as main reasons for t h e wide p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e mode: f o r r i v e r b a s i n s i n t h e

Gecker, A . : Kozerski, D. (1976): Simulation der Hochwassersteuerung innerhalb e i nes Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodells. WWT, 26. Jg., H. 7, S . 235-239 Becker, A.; K r i p p e n d o r f , H.; T h i e l e , W. (1978) : E insatz von Modellen fur e i n e e f f e k t i v e r e Bewirtschaftung der Oberflaechengewaesser. Die Technik, 33. Jg., H. 8, S . 432-435.

B o t h , W.; K o z e r s k i , D. (1980): Das LBM Spree-Berl i n und seine Anwendung in der wasserwirtschaftlichen Praxis. WWT, 30. Jg., H. 12, s.

41 3 - 4 1 4 .
Cohon, J . L . ; Marks, D.H. (1975): A review and evaluation of mu 1 t io b j e c t ive programming techniques. Water Resources. Res. 1 1 , H.2. G.; Boehme, J. (1980): Dietz, E r g e b n i s s e aus d e r E r a r b e i t u n g und Anwendung von Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodellen (LBM). WWT, 30. Jg., H. 6, S. 183- 1 8 5 . Durbin, E.P.; Kroenke, D .M. (1967) :The Out-of - K i 1 t e r Algorithm: a primer. Rand Co., Memorandum RM-5472-PR. u.a. (1980): Angewandte Dyck, S . Hydrologie, Teil 1 und 2 . 2. Auflage. Verlag fur Bauwesen, Berlin.

GDR.

F o r n e r , B.; Hartmann, K.; Woywodt, PI. (1979) : Mathematisches fur die Model 1 wasserwirtschaftliche lnvestitionsplanung in Fluss und V e r s o r g u n g s g e b i e t e n . WWT, 29. Jg., H. 6, S . 204-206. Krippendorf, H.; Gruenewald, U.; T h i e l e , W. (1977) : E r a r b e i t u n g und Anwendung e i nes B e w i r t s c h a f t u n g s m o d e l l s fur das Flussgebiet der Bode. Mitt. des IfW B e r l i n , S o n d e r h e f t 2. Haimes, Y . Y . ; H a l l , W.A.; Freedman, Multiobjective H.T. (1975) : O p t i m i z a t i o n i n Water R e s o u r c e s Systems. New Y o r k : Elsevier S c i e n t i f i c P u b l i s h i n g Company. H a i t h , D.A.; Loucks, D.P. (1976): Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Water-Resources Planning. In: Systems Approach t o Water Management. E d i t e d b y A.K. B i swas New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lehmann, H . ; S c h e t t l e r , G . ; Hubald, B i s h e r i ge C. (1981) : aus der Ergebnisse des Praxissnwendung Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodells Mulde (LBM). WWT, 31. Jg., H . 8, S . 260-262. Major, D.C. (1977): Multiobjective P1 ann i ng. Water Resource Amer i can D. C. : Washington, Geophysical Union. Palmer, R.N., et Policy Analysis Operation i n the Bas i n. Univ. Techn. R e p o r t No. al. (1979) : o f Reservoir Potomac R i v e r of Maryland,

59.

R i e c h e r t , D.; Z i l m , K.-H.; Ruediger, A.: Schramm, M.; Rahn, U.; B o r k , E. (1979) : Erhoehung d e r Wasserabgabe aus S e e n s p e i c h e r n irn F l u s s g e b i e t Warnow d u r c h e i n Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodel. WWT, 29. Jg., H. 7 , s . 229-232. Schramrn, M. (1975) : Zur mathemat i schen D a r s t e l lung und S i m u l a t i o n des n a t u e r l i c h e n Durchflussprozesses. Acta h y d r o p h y s i c a , Bd. X I X , H. 2-3. Schramm, M. (1981) : Anwendung stochastischer Simulationstechniken zur Oberflaechenwasserbewirtschaftung. S o n d e r h e f t e zum A b s c h l u s s e d e r I . Phase des I H P , NK I H P d e r DDR, IfW B e r l i n , H.3. S k i a o , V . ; Mc S p a r r a n , J.E. Reappraisal o f Water (1971): Supply

Hufschmidt, M.M.; Fiering, M.B. (1966): S i m u l a t i o n Techniques for D e s i g n o f Water R e s o u r c e s Systems. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, M a s s a c h u s e t t s . David, L. Keeney, R.L.; Wood, E . F . ; (1976): Evaluating T i s t a River B a s i n Development P l a n s U s i n g M u l t i a t t r i b u t e U t i l i t y Theory. I I A S A , CP-76-3, Laxenburg.
!( i nd 1 e r , J (1981) : Optima 1 A l l o c a t i o n o f Water R e s o u r c e s . Int. Conference on Hydrology. 1981. Unesco, P a r i s , Aug.

Kozersk i , D. (1981) : Rechenprogrammsystern GRM als verallgemeinertes Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodell. Tei 1 I: Vera1 l g e m e i n e r t e der Model 1 i e r u n g Bewirtschaftungsprozesse. WWT, H. 11, S. 390-394, 3l.Jg. Tei 1 II: Rechentechnische Realisierung. WWT, 31. Jg. , H. 1 2 , ' s . 415-419. Krippendorf, H.; S c h r amm , M. Ana 1 y s e (1 970) : innerrncnatlicher Durchflusschwankungen. WWT, 20. 1 1 , S. 367-375. Jg., H.

G.G. (1964) : Osnovy Svanidze, r a s c e t a r e g u l i r o v a n i j a recnogo stoka metodom Monte-Carlo zur (Berechnungsgrund 1 agen Regelung des Abflusses in F.1 u e s s e n nach der Monte-Carlo-Methode), Tbilissi: m e c n i e r e b a 1964.

Thomas, H . A . ; F i e r i n g , H.B. (1962): I n Maass e t a l . : The d e s i g n o f water resource systems. Cambridge: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press,

-189-

A.Stochastic

s i m u l a t i o n model o f t h e a v a i l a b l e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s

Separatestochastic generation o f time series o f hydrological i n p u t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s (e.g. s e t s o f 100 years records o f monthly r i v e r s discharges)

B . D e t e r m i n i s t i c water'management model ( r e p e a t e d a p p l i c a t i o n f o r f o r p l a n n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s of i n t e r e s t )

JI
w a t e r demand, flood protection, minimum r i v e r discharge, etc.

D e t a i l e d b a l a n c i n g of t h e a v a i l a b l e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s (as p r e - g e n e r a t e d ) w i t h w a t e r demands and o t h e r r e q u i r e m e n t s , and a l l o c a t i o n o f w a t e r resources from r e s e r v o i r s according t o g i v e n c o n t r o l s t r a t e g i e s , user p r i o r i t i e s , etc.

month 1 y

time step

C.

F i n a l s t a t i s t i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , e v a l u a t i o n and p r i n t i n g o f t h e s i m u l a t i o n r e s u l t s f o r each p l a n n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e

A n a l y s i s o f t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e comput a t i o n s w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n makers
J

S e t u p o f new a l t e r n a t i v e s o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management and a l l o c a t i o n ( i f required) i n coordination w i t h t h e w a t e r u s e r s , d e c i s i o n makers e t c . ( i n c l u d i n g new system e l e m e n t s , modification of control strategies, t e c h n o l o g i e s o f w a t e r use, e t c .

for a d d i t i o n a l model r u n s

D e c i s i o n m a k i n g on t h e optimum s y s t e m d e s i g n , w a t e r r e s o u r c e s a l l o c a t i o n and management

Fig.

M a i n components o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s system d e s i g n and management i n r i v e r b a s i n s b y means o f s i m u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s .

-190-

Fig.

2.:

I m p o r t a n t Elements i n Water R e s o u r c e s Systems P a n n i n g and Management

A.

New w a t e r s t r u c ur es

Reservoirs Water t r a n s f e r c h a n n e l s and p i p e s Flood control structures Water t r e a t m e n t p l a n t s etc.

B . Changes o f c o n t r o l s t r a t e g i e s f o r t h e e x i s t i n g and f o r
planned water s t r u c t u r e s

- C o n t r o l o f r e s e r v o i r s , water uses,

C.

water transfers, e t c . I n s t a l l a t i o n o f more e f f i c i e n t r e a l - t i m e f o r e c a s t i n g and c o n t r o l s y s t e m s A l t e r n a t i v e t e c h n o l o g i e s o f water use

D.

in industry for irrigation f o r p u b l i c , e n v i r o n m e n t a l and o t h e r purposes

A l t e r n a t i v e a l l o c a t i o n of water resources i n regard o f

priorities

- economical a s p e c t s - s o c i a l , e n v i r o n m e n t a l and o t h e r a s p e c t s

-191-

P 7.7

L I

Fig. 3

representation o f CI r i v e r network with buhnce points (P), users [ N ) and reservoirs (S)
Schematic

-192-

I
\

\
\

95

90

-220 000

240000

260000 280000 (m3/d)

Drinking wdep supply

(hmJ)

Flood confrol volume

Fig.4

Reliability of drinking wafer supply Rs and possible flood dQmages in dependence of the a) amount of drinking wcrrep supply b) flood control volume

-193-

i
74

72

C: reduced release before ond after fhe peok Flow period (0.7)

2
1

release
1

Fig.5

Longferrn f l o o d risk below Jhe Saole reservoir system for U definite flood con trot volume [cur ve A )

-194-

100

-- 7
si m ula fed : x 2
a

derived from observafions

5 0

no reservoir one reservoli, (uncontrolled ouf ief )

20

7 0

.i
20
1

1
AI7

recurrence inferval (years)

IO
I
I I

90

50

70

1I

exceedence

probability (%)

Fig. 6

Probobill' fy distribution. func flons o f flaod peak flow ai U river cross-section (75km2) for uncontrolled and con f r olled condiflbns.

-195-

T a b l e 1: D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e c o n t i y u r a t i o n o f t h e r i v e r system i n f i g . 3 . Balance point (external notation)

P P P P P P P P P P P

Internal Index
K

Network conf i y u r a t i o n vector NEXT/\</ 2 3

4

11 . 1.21 1.3 1.7 1.75 1.8 2.1 2.2 3.1 3.3 4.2

1 2 3
4

5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1

5 6 -999
U

5 10 4 10

T a b l e 2 : D e s c r i p t i o n o f some u s e r s i n the r i v e r basin of fig.

3.

x ) Remark: S m a l l e r p r e f e r e n c e number Z means h i g h e r p r i o r i t y

-196-

rl

dd

00 00

dd

00 00

0
rl

o * * *
rl

r4

000000
-.-.

... -