IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v37y2017i3d10.1007_s10669-017-9639-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applicability of sustainable urban drainage systems: an evaluation by multi-criteria analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ho Huu Loc

    (Asian Institute of Technology
    Kyoto University)

  • Pham Minh Duyen

    (Asian Institute of Technology)

  • Thomas J. Ballatore

    (Kyoto University
    Lake Basin Action Network)

  • Nguyen Hoang My Lan

    (University of Social Sciences and Humanities)

  • Ashim Gupta

    (Asian Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Urban flooding has become more serious and worldwide in recent years, especially in the big cities of developing countries. This study uses a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) approach to evaluate the applicability of sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS), a flood control measure, in the central part of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The output of the personal computer storm water management model along with interviews with 140 households was used to assess the efficacy and acceptability of four SUDS alternatives: rainwater harvesting, green roof, urban green space and pervious pavement. On technical performance, green roof was the best alternative, followed by pervious pavement, urban green space and rainwater harvesting. Results of the social survey, however, diverged largely from the results of the technical assessments. In particular, people generally prefer public SUDS such as urban green space and pervious pavements to household solutions. With respect to the MCA, we applied four different procedures: Borda count, pair-wise voting, range of value and analytic hierarchy process. Despite some differences, the integrated results from MCA largely agree that urban green space is the most favourable type of SUDS, followed by green roof, pervious pavement and rainwater harvesting.

Suggested Citation

  • Ho Huu Loc & Pham Minh Duyen & Thomas J. Ballatore & Nguyen Hoang My Lan & Ashim Gupta, 2017. "Applicability of sustainable urban drainage systems: an evaluation by multi-criteria analysis," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 332-343, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:37:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10669-017-9639-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-017-9639-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-017-9639-4
    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/s10669-017-9639-4?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. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    2. Vijayaraghavan, K., 2016. "Green roofs: A critical review on the role of components, benefits, limitations and trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 740-752.
    3. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    4. Hiltunen, Veikko & Kangas, Jyrki & Pykalainen, Jouni, 2008. "Voting methods in strategic forest planning -- Experiences from Metsahallitus," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 117-127, January.
    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. Le Duc Anh & Ho Huu Loc & Kim N. Irvine & Tran Thanh & Luong Quang Tuong, 2021. "The waterscape of groundwater exploitation for domestic uses in District 12, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7652-7669, May.
    2. Zachary A. Collier & James H. Lambert & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Advances in life cycle analysis, econometrics, optimization, R&D policy, and health decision making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 241-242, September.
    3. Anik Gupta & Carlos J. Slebi-Acevedo & Esther Lizasoain-Arteaga & Jorge Rodriguez-Hernandez & Daniel Castro-Fresno, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Selection of Additives in Porous Asphalt Mixtures Using Mechanical, Hydraulic, Economic, and Environmental Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    4. Daniel Mora-Melià & Carlos S. López-Aburto & Pablo Ballesteros-Pérez & Pedro Muñoz-Velasco, 2018. "Viability of Green Roofs as a Flood Mitigation Element in the Central Region of Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, April.

    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. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    2. Zheng Yuan & Baohua Wen & Cheng He & Jin Zhou & Zhonghua Zhou & Feng Xu, 2022. "Application of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Analysis to Rural Spatial Sustainability Evaluation: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-31, May.
    3. Valentin Bertsch & Wolf Fichtner, 2016. "A participatory multi-criteria approach for power generation and transmission planning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 177-207, October.
    4. Read, Laura & Madani, Kaveh & Mokhtari, Soroush & Hanks, Catherine, 2017. "Stakeholder-driven multi-attribute analysis for energy project selection under uncertainty," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 744-753.
    5. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Güleryüz, Sezin, 2016. "An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 435-448.
    6. Vasileiou, Margarita & Loukogeorgaki, Eva & Vagiona, Dimitra G., 2017. "GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis for site selection of hybrid offshore wind and wave energy systems in Greece," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 745-757.
    7. Calabrese, Armando & Costa, Roberta & Levialdi, Nathan & Menichini, Tamara, 2019. "Integrating sustainability into strategic decision-making: A fuzzy AHP method for the selection of relevant sustainability issues," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 155-168.
    8. Sagir, Emrah & Alipour, Siamak, 2021. "Photofermentative hydrogen production by immobilized photosynthetic bacteria: Current perspectives and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    9. Mohammad AlHashmi & Gyan Chhipi-Shrestha & Rajeev Ruparathna & Kh Md Nahiduzzaman & Kasun Hewage & Rehan Sadiq, 2021. "Energy Performance Assessment Framework for Residential Buildings in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    12. Muhammad Mohsin & Yin Hengbin & Zhang Luyao & Li Rui & Qian Chong & Ana Mehak, 2022. "An Application of Multiple-Criteria Decision Analysis for Risk Prioritization and Management: A Case Study of the Fisheries Sector in Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-21, July.
    13. Sitorus, Fernando & Brito-Parada, Pablo R., 2020. "A multiple criteria decision making method to weight the sustainability criteria of renewable energy technologies under uncertainty," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    14. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Participatory selection of sustainability criteria and indicators for bioenergy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 92-102.
    15. Rosso-Cerón, A.M. & León-Cardona, D.F. & Kafarov, V., 2021. "Soft computing tool for aiding the integration of hybrid sustainable renewable energy systems, case of Putumayo, Colombia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 616-634.
    16. Çelikbilek, Yakup & Tüysüz, Fatih, 2016. "An integrated grey based multi-criteria decision making approach for the evaluation of renewable energy sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 1246-1258.
    17. Stein, Eric W., 2013. "A comprehensive multi-criteria model to rank electric energy production technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 640-654.
    18. Rosso-Cerón, A.M. & Kafarov, V. & Latorre-Bayona, G. & Quijano-Hurtado, R., 2019. "A novel hybrid approach based on fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making tools for assessing sustainable alternatives of power generation in San Andrés Island," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 159-173.
    19. Lin, Sheng-Hau & Zhao, Xiaofeng & Wu, Jiuxing & Liang, Fachao & Li, Jia-Hsuan & Lai, Ren-Ji & Hsieh, Jing-Chzi & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2021. "An evaluation framework for developing green infrastructure by using a new hybrid multiple attribute decision-making model for promoting environmental sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    20. Domenech, B. & Ferrer-Martí, L. & Pastor, R., 2015. "Hierarchical methodology to optimize the design of stand-alone electrification systems for rural communities considering technical and social criteria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 182-196.

    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:37:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10669-017-9639-4. 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.