IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p14433-d962912.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

River Ecosystem Health Assessment Using a Combination Weighting Method: A Case Study of Beijing Section of Yongding River in China

Author

Listed:
  • Linglong Chen

    (Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Lan Ma

    (Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Jiamen Jiji

    (Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Qingqi Kong

    (Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Zizhao Ni

    (Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Lin Yan

    (Key Laboratory of State Forestry and Grassland Administration on Soil and Water Conservation, School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Chengzhong Pan

    (Beijing Key Laboratory of Urban Hydrological Cycle and Sponge City Technology, College of Water Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

Abstract

(1) Background: River health assessment provides the foundation for sustainable river development and management. However, existing assessments have no uniform standards and methods. (2) Methods: The combination weighting method was proposed, drawing on the advantages of subjective and objective weighting methods. To comprehensively investigate the river health level, an index system based on 16 indices selected from river morphology, river water environment, riparian condition, and social services level was established. The method and framework were applied to the Beijing section of Yongding River in China. (3) Results: The comprehensive weights of river morphology, river water environment, riparian condition, and social services are 0.1614, 0.3170, 0.4459, and 0.0757, respectively. The river health comprehensive index of Yongding River is 3.805; the percentages of excellent, healthy, sub-healthy, unhealthy, and sick river segments are 0%, 11%, 69%, 20%, and 0%, respectively. (4) Conclusions: The results indicate that Yongding River is in a sub-healthy state, and the riparian condition is the key factor that affects the river ecosystem health. Health level exhibited a remarkable spatial variation, mainly influenced by anthropogenic activities, and effective measures are needed to minimize the impact in fragile ecological areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Linglong Chen & Lan Ma & Jiamen Jiji & Qingqi Kong & Zizhao Ni & Lin Yan & Chengzhong Pan, 2022. "River Ecosystem Health Assessment Using a Combination Weighting Method: A Case Study of Beijing Section of Yongding River in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14433-:d:962912
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14433/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14433/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vollmer, D. & Shaad, K. & Souter, N. J. & Farrell, T. & Dudgeon, D. & Sullivan, C. A. & Fauconnier, I. & MacDonald, G. M. & McCartney, Matthew P. & Power, A. G. & McNally, A. & Andelman, S. J. & Capon, 2018. "Integrating the social, hydrological and ecological dimensions of freshwater health: the freshwater health index," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 627:304-627.
    2. Xu, Xiaozhan, 2004. "A note on the subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 530-532, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fanghui Yi & Chen Li & Yan Feng, 2018. "Two precautions of entropy-weighting model in drought-risk assessment," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 93(1), pages 339-347, August.
    2. Renaud, Jean & Levrat, Eric & Fonteix, Christian, 2008. "Weights determination of OWA operators by parametric identification," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 77(5), pages 499-511.
    3. Badir S. Alsaeed & Dexter V. L. Hunt & Soroosh Sharifi, 2024. "A Sustainable Water Resources Management Assessment Framework (SWRM-AF) for Arid and Semi-Arid Regions—Part 1: Developing the Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-43, March.
    4. Rađenović Žarko & Veselinović Ivana, 2017. "Integrated AHP-TOPSIS Method for the Assessment of Health Management Information Systems Efficiency," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 55(1), pages 121-142, March.
    5. (Ato) Xu, Wangtu & Zhou, Jiangping & Yang, Linchuan & Li, Ling, 2018. "The implications of high-speed rail for Chinese cities: Connectivity and accessibility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 308-326.
    6. Lianmeng Jiao & Quan Pan & Yan Liang & Xiaoxue Feng & Feng Yang, 2016. "Combining sources of evidence with reliability and importance for decision making," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 87-106, March.
    7. Omid Bozorg-Haddad & Mohammad Delpasand & Sarvin ZamanZad-Ghavidel & Xuefeng Chu, 2024. "Developing a novel social–water capital index by gene expression programming," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 28187-28217, November.
    8. Junhong Chen & Yanjun Kong & Yadong Mei, 2022. "Riverine Health Assessment Using Coordinated Development Degree Model Based on Natural and Social Functions in the Lhasa River, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-17, June.
    9. Mika Marttunen & Jyri Mustajoki & Suvi Sojamo & Lauri Ahopelto & Marko Keskinen, 2019. "A Framework for Assessing Water Security and the Water–Energy–Food Nexus—The Case of Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    10. Chien, Herlin & Saito, Osamu, 2021. "Evaluating social–ecological fit in urban stream management: The role of governing institutions in sustainable urban ecosystem service provision," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    11. Donald Ukpanyang & Julio Terrados-Cepeda & Manuel Jesus Hermoso-Orzaez, 2022. "Multi-Criteria Selection of Waste-to-Energy Technologies for Slum/Informal Settlements Using the PROMETHEE Technique: A Case Study of the Greater Karu Urban Area in Nigeria," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-26, May.
    12. Zhiming Li & Zhengxi Fan & Shiguang Shen, 2018. "Urban Green Space Suitability Evaluation Based on the AHP-CV Combined Weight Method: A Case Study of Fuping County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Ewa Roszkowska, 2020. "The extention rank ordering criteria weighting methods in fuzzy enviroment," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 91-114.
    14. Wang, Qi & Wu, Chong & Sun, Yang, 2015. "Evaluating corporate social responsibility of airlines using entropy weight and grey relation analysis," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 55-62.
    15. Bruno Ricca & Massimiliano Ferrara & Salvatore Loprevite, 2023. "Searching for an effective accounting-based score of firm performance: a comparative study between different synthesis techniques," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 3575-3602, August.
    16. Renaud, J. & Thibault, J. & Lanouette, R. & Kiss, L.N. & Zaras, K. & Fonteix, C., 2007. "Comparison of two multicriteria decision aid methods: Net Flow and Rough Set Methods in a high yield pulping process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1418-1432, March.
    17. Vera Shanshan Lin & Yuan Qin & Tianyu Ying & Shujie Shen & Guangming Lyu, 2022. "Night-time economy vitality index: Framework and evidence," Tourism Economics, , vol. 28(3), pages 665-691, May.
    18. Dongye Sun & Yuanhua Jia & Lingqiao Qin & Yang Yang & Juyong Zhang, 2018. "A Variance Maximization Based Weight Optimization Method for Railway Transportation Safety Performance Measurement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.
    19. Yang, Guo-liang & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling & Khoveyni, Mohammad, 2017. "A three-stage hybrid approach for weight assignment in MADM," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 93-105.
    20. Enrica Garau & Josep Vila-Subiros & Josep Pueyo-Ros & Anna Ribas Palom, 2020. "Where Do Ecosystem Services Come From? Assessing and Mapping Stakeholder Perceptions on Water Ecosystem Services in the Muga River Basin (Catalonia, Spain)," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-21, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14433-:d:962912. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.