IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v35y2015i4d10.1007_s10669-015-9567-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multi-attribute decision-making approach to the selection of point-of-use water treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Sheree A. Pagsuyoin

    (University of Massachusetts-Lowell)

  • Joost R. Santos

    (George Washington University)

  • Jana S. Latayan

    (Acton-Boxborough Regional High School)

  • John R. Barajas

    (De La Salle University)

Abstract

Despite the recent major accomplishment in meeting our global water target in the UN Millennium Development Goal 7, a significant number of people, mostly in low-income regions, are still without access to reliable and safe water sources. To address the health burden of inadequate water in these regions, several point-of-use (POU) treatment technologies have been developed and are now available in the market. This outcome has created both an opportunity and a challenge in selecting technologies that are suitable in poor communities. In the current work, we present an application of the multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) methodology to rank and select options for POU water treatment technologies that are appropriate for low-income communities. The paper makes three significant research contributions. Firstly, we review the features, efficacy, and operation of currently available POU water treatment technologies to identify challenges in their implementation. Secondly, we propose a set of evaluation criteria, categorized into four general themes, for assessing the efficacy and suitability of a POU water treatment technology in a given area. We also examine the application of MADM methodology in prioritizing alternatives using these criteria as attributes. Finally, we present a case application of our proposed methodology in a rural municipality in Quezon Province, Philippines. Six common POU water treatment alternatives were considered: solar disinfection, boiling, chlorination, combined disinfection and flocculation with Moringa oleifera, ceramic filtration and biosand filtration. Results of the analysis show that water treatment with M. oleifera and ceramic filters are the most preferred treatment alternatives in the municipality, while chlorination is the least preferred. The most important factors for selecting water treatment methods are initial costs, by-products of water treatment, throughput, and energy input. The proposed MADM model can be applied to other areas where a centralized water treatment system is not available, and a suitable POU water treatment is needed. The inclusion of multi criteria considerations in the selection process ensures that the chosen POU water treatment provides the optimal health, economic, and environmental benefits to the community.

Suggested Citation

  • Sheree A. Pagsuyoin & Joost R. Santos & Jana S. Latayan & John R. Barajas, 2015. "A multi-attribute decision-making approach to the selection of point-of-use water treatment," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 437-452, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:35:y:2015:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-015-9567-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-015-9567-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-015-9567-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-015-9567-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, October.
    2. Chen, Y. & Ahsan, H., 2004. "Cancer Burden from Arsenic in Drinking Water in Bangladesh," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 94(5), pages 741-744.
    3. Hanjra, Munir A. & Qureshi, M. Ejaz, 2010. "Global water crisis and future food security in an era of climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 365-377, October.
    4. Jeffrey Demarest & Sheree Pagsuyoin & Gerard Learmonth & Jonathan Mellor & Rebecca Dillingham, 2013. "Development of a Spatial and Temporal Agent-Based Model for Studying Water and Health Relationships: The Case Study of Two Villages in Limpopo, South Africa," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 16(4), pages 1-3.
    5. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    6. Mintz, E.D. & Bartram, J. & Lochery, P. & Wegelin, M., 2001. "Not just a drop in the bucket: Expanding access to point-of-use water treatment systems," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 91(10), pages 1565-1570.
    7. Jamie Bartram & Sandy Cairncross, 2010. "Hygiene, Sanitation, and Water: Forgotten Foundations of Health," Working Papers id:3325, eSocialSciences.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Isabel Domínguez & Edgar Ricardo Oviedo-Ocaña & Karen Hurtado & Andrés Barón & Ralph P. Hall, 2019. "Assessing Sustainability in Rural Water Supply Systems in Developing Countries Using a Novel Tool Based on Multi-Criteria Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Z. A. Collier & J. H. Lambert & I. Linkov, 2015. "Application of systems modeling and risk assessment to address real-world decision-making challenges," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 425-426, December.

    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. Karasakal, Esra & Aker, Pınar, 2017. "A multicriteria sorting approach based on data envelopment analysis for R&D project selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 79-92.
    2. Figueira, Jose & Roy, Bernard, 2002. "Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos' procedure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 317-326, June.
    3. Shiau, Tzay-An, 2013. "Evaluating sustainable transport strategies for the counties of Taiwan based on their degree of urbanization," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 101-108.
    4. Carlos José Miranda Victório & Helder Gomes Costa & Cristina Gomes de Souza, 2016. "Modeling selection criteria of R&D projects for awarding direct subsidies to the private sector," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 275-287.
    5. Joseph Kangmennaang & Elijah Bisung & Susan J. Elliott, 2020. "‘We Are Drinking Diseases’: Perception of Water Insecurity and Emotional Distress in Urban Slums in Accra, Ghana," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Ward, Frank A., 2023. "Innovations for the Water Resource Economics Curriculum: Training the Next Generation," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 5(3), September.
    7. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2004. "A new airline safety index," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 369-383, May.
    8. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    9. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio, 2016. "Combining analytical hierarchy process and Choquet integral within non-additive robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 2-18.
    10. Punys, P. & Radzevičius, A. & Kvaraciejus, A. & Gasiūnas, V. & Šilinis, L., 2019. "A multi-criteria analysis for siting surface-flow constructed wetlands in tile-drained agricultural catchments: The case of Lithuania," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 1036-1046.
    11. Katie Steele & Yohay Carmel & Jean Cross & Chris Wilcox, 2009. "Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 26-33, January.
    12. Daniel R. Georgiadis & Thomas A. Mazzuchi & Shahram Sarkani, 2013. "Using multi criteria decision making in analysis of alternatives for selection of enabling technology," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 287-303, September.
    13. Anshu, Kumari & Gaur, Loveleen & Singh, Gurmeet, 2022. "Impact of customer experience on attitude and repurchase intention in online grocery retailing: A moderation mechanism of value Co-creation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Salah Ghabri & Jean-Michel Josselin & Benoît Le Maux, 2019. "Could or Should We Use MCDA in the French HTA Process?," Post-Print halshs-02319704, HAL.
    15. Nopadon Kronprasert & Antti Talvitie, 2015. "Use of reasoning maps in evaluation of transport alternatives: inclusion of uncertainty and “I Don’t Know”: demonstration of a method," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 389-406, March.
    16. Marco Aurélio Sernagiotto & Valério Rosset & Mariá C. V. Nascimento, 2022. "A novel multi-objective approach for link selection in aeronautical telecommunication networks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 319(2), pages 1-31, December.
    17. Johannes S. Timmermans & Giampiero E.G. Beroggi, 2004. "An Experimental Assessment of Coleman's Linear System of Action for Supporting Policy Negotiations," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 267-285, November.
    18. Dalton Garcia Borges de Souza & Erivelton Antonio dos Santos & Nei Yoshihiro Soma & Carlos Eduardo Sanches da Silva, 2021. "MCDM-Based R&D Project Selection: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-34, October.
    19. Ward, Frank A., 2023. "Innovations for the Water Resource Economics Curriculum: Training the Next Generation," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 5(2), April.
    20. Salah Ghabri & Jean-Michel Josselin & Benoît Maux, 2019. "Could or Should We Use MCDA in the French HTA Process?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(12), pages 1417-1419, December.

    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:spr:envsyd:v:35:y:2015:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-015-9567-0. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.