IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i15p8152-d598692.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritization and Analysis of Watershed: A Study Applied to Municipal Solid Waste

Author

Listed:
  • Juan Antonio Araiza-Aguilar

    (Escuela de Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas, Libramiento Norte Poniente No. 1150, Col. Lajas Maciel, Tuxtla Gutiérrez 29000, Chiapas, Mexico)

  • María Neftalí Rojas-Valencia

    (Instituto de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria, Ciudad de México 04510, Mexico)

  • Hugo Alejandro Nájera-Aguilar

    (Escuela de Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas, Libramiento Norte Poniente No. 1150, Col. Lajas Maciel, Tuxtla Gutiérrez 29000, Chiapas, Mexico)

  • Rubén Fernando Gutiérrez-Hernández

    (Departamento de Ingeniería Química y Bioquímica, Tecnológico Nacional de México—Instituto Tecnológico de Tapachula, Km. 2 Carretera a Puerto Madero s/n., Tapachula 30700, Chiapas, Mexico)

  • Rebeca Isabel Martínez-Salinas

    (Escuela de Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas, Libramiento Norte Poniente No. 1150, Col. Lajas Maciel, Tuxtla Gutiérrez 29000, Chiapas, Mexico)

  • Carlos Manuel García-Lara

    (Escuela de Ingeniería Ambiental, Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas, Libramiento Norte Poniente No. 1150, Col. Lajas Maciel, Tuxtla Gutiérrez 29000, Chiapas, Mexico)

Abstract

This paper shows a watershed prioritization analysis applied to municipal solid waste. The study area was the macrowatershed “Cañón del Sumidero”, in the state of Chiapas, Mexico. Geographic information systems, multi-criteria evaluation techniques, as well as several geomorphometric, land use, vegetation and waste management variables were used. The results indicate that, of the set of watersheds analyzed (4 subwatersheds and 80 microwatersheds), only 14 (2 subwatersheds and 12 microwatersheds) have high priority, since they are severely affected by the mismanagement of solid waste. This is also due to the major presence of urban settlements, which are places with different dynamics in terms of population growth, migration, as well as access to infrastructure and services, such as collection and final disposal of waste. Additionally, the incidence of certain biophysical and geomorphometric variables, such as steep slopes, high rainfall and high drainage density, among others, exacerbate the waste-related problems. The remaining watersheds (2 subwatersheds and 68 microwatersheds) showed moderate or low prioritization values because of the low amount of solid waste produced there. Finally, this work concludes that the regionalization of municipalities and the management of solid waste through decentralized operating agencies can help solve solid waste management problems since this approach would permit to delegate non-primary activities from watershed operating agencies to other specialized waste agencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Antonio Araiza-Aguilar & María Neftalí Rojas-Valencia & Hugo Alejandro Nájera-Aguilar & Rubén Fernando Gutiérrez-Hernández & Rebeca Isabel Martínez-Salinas & Carlos Manuel García-Lara, 2021. "Prioritization and Analysis of Watershed: A Study Applied to Municipal Solid Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8152-:d:598692
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8152/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/15/8152/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Omid Rahmati & Ali Haghizadeh & Stefanos Stefanidis, 2016. "Assessing the Accuracy of GIS-Based Analytical Hierarchy Process for Watershed Prioritization; Gorganrood River Basin, Iran," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(3), pages 1131-1150, February.
    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. Reza Esmaili & Seyedeh Atefeh Karipour, 2024. "Comparison of weighting methods of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) in evaluation of flood hazard index," 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. 120(9), pages 8619-8638, July.
    2. Rabin Chakrabortty & Subodh Chandra Pal & Alireza Arabameri & Phuong Thao Thi Ngo & Indrajit Chowdhuri & Paramita Roy & Sadhan Malik & Biswajit Das, 2022. "Water-induced erosion potentiality and vulnerability assessment in Kangsabati river basin, eastern India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3518-3557, March.
    3. Atul Kumar & Sunil Singh & Malay Pramanik & Shairy Chaudhary & Ashwani Kumar Maurya & Manoj Kumar, 2022. "Watershed prioritization for soil erosion mapping in the Lesser Himalayan Indian basin using PCA and WSA methods in conjunction with morphometric parameters and GIS-based approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3723-3761, March.
    4. Cassie Roopnarine & Bheshem Ramlal & Ronald Roopnarine, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Weighting Methods in Geospatial Flood Risk Assessment: A Trinidad Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-30, September.
    5. Chengguang Lai & Xiaohong Chen & Zhaoli Wang & Haijun Yu & Xiaoyan Bai, 2020. "Flood Risk Assessment and Regionalization from Past and Future Perspectives at Basin Scale," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1399-1417, July.

    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:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:15:p:8152-:d:598692. 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.