Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Uncertainty modelling in multi-criteria analysis of water safety measures

  • Published:
Environment Systems and Decisions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Water utilities must assess risks and make decisions on safety measures in order to obtain a safe and sustainable drinking water supply. The World Health Organization emphasises preparation of water safety plans, in which risk ranking by means of risk matrices with discretised probability and consequence scales is commonly used. Risk ranking enables prioritisation of risks, but there is currently no common and structured way of performing uncertainty analysis and using risk ranking for evaluating and comparing water safety measures. To enable a proper prioritisation of safety measures and an efficient use of available resources for risk reduction, two alternative models linking risk ranking and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) are presented and evaluated. The two models specifically enable uncertainty modelling in MCDA, and they differ in terms of how uncertainties in risk levels are considered. The need of formal handling of risk and uncertainty in MCDA is emphasised in the literature, and the suggested models provide innovations that are not dependent on the application domain. In the case study application presented here, possible safety measures are evaluated based on the benefit of estimated risk reduction, the cost of implementation and the probability of not achieving an acceptable risk level. Additional criteria such as environmental impact and consumer trust may also be included when applying the models. The case study shows how safety measures can be ranked based on preference scores or cost-effectiveness and how measures not reducing the risk enough can be identified and disqualified. Furthermore, the probability of each safety measure being ranked highest can be calculated. The two models provide a stepwise procedure for prioritising safety measures and enable a formalised handling of uncertainties in input data and results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AZ/NZS. Handbook: risk management guidelines—companion to AS/NZS 4360:2004. Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, 2004

  • Bartram J, Corrales L, Davison A, Deere D, Drury D, Gordon B et al (2009) Water safety plan manual: step-by-step risk management for drinking-water suppliers. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedford T, Cooke RM (2001) Probabilistic risk analysis: foundations and methods. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard C, Abi-Zeid I, Beauchamp N, Lamontagne L, Desrosiers J, Rodriguez M (2010) Multicriteria decision analysis for the selection of a small drinking water treatment system. J Water Supply Res Technol—AQUA 59:230–242

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Box GEP, Hunter JS, Hunter WG (2005) Statistics for experimenters: design, innovation and discovery. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgman MA (2005) Risks and decisions for conservation and environmental management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Communities and Local Government. Multi-criteria analysis: a manual. department for communities and local government, 2009

  • Cox AL (2008) What’s wrong with risk matrices? Risk Anal 28:497–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davison A, Howard G, Stevens M, Callan P, Fewtrell L, Deere D et al (2005) Water safety plans: managing drinking-water quality from catchment to consumer. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajkowicz S, Collins K (2007) A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Resour Manag 21:1553–1566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Havelaar AH (1994) Application of HACCP to drinking water supply. Food Control 5:145–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyde KM, Maier HR, Colby CB (2004) Reliability-based approach to multicriteria decision analysis for water resources. J Water Resour Plan Manag 130:429–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IEC Dependability management—Part 3: application guide—section 9: risk analysis of technological systems. International Electrotechnical Commission, 1995

  • Jaynes ET (1968) Prior probabilities. Syst Sci Cybern, IEEE Trans on 4:227–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joerin F, Cool G, Rodriguez MJ, Gignac M, Bouchard C (2009) Using multi-criteria decision analysis to assess the vulnerability of drinking water utilities. Environ Monit Assess 166:313–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan S, Garrick BJ (1981) On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 1:11–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan S, Haimes YY, Garrick BJ (2001) Fitting hierarchical holographic modeling into the theory of scenario structuring and a resulting refinement to the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 21:807–819

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decision with multiple objectives: preference and value tradeoffs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin HM, McEwan PJ (2001) Cost-effectiveness analysis: methods and applications. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindhe A, Rosén L, Norberg T, Bergstedt O (2009) Fault tree analysis for integrated and probabilistic risk analysis of drinking water systems. Water Res 43:1641–1653

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lindhe A, Rosén L, Norberg T, Bergstedt O, Pettersson TJR (2011) Cost-effectiveness analysis of risk-reduction measures to reach water safety targets. Water Res 45:241–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Melchers RE (2001) On the ALARP approach to risk management. Reliab Eng Sys Saf 71:201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nas TF (1996) Cost-benefit analysis: Theory and application. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications

  • NFSA (2006) Improved safety and emergency preparedness in water supply: Guidance (In Norwegian). Norwegian food safety authority Oslo

  • Rosén L, Gustafson G (1996) A Bayesian Markov geostatistical model for estimation of hydrogeological properties. Ground Water 34:865–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosén L, Lindhe A, Bergstedt O, Norberg T, Pettersson TJR (2010) Comparing risk-reduction measures to reach water safety targets using an integrated fault tree model. Water Sci Technol: Water Supply 10:428–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum MS, Rosén L, Gustafson G (1997) Probabilistic models for estimating lithology. Eng Geol 47:43–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Røstum J, Eikebrokk B. (2008) Risk and vulnerability analysis of the Bergen water supply system (In Norwegian). SINTEF

  • Røstum J, Aasen A, Eikebrokk B (2009) Risk and vulnerability assessment (“Ros-Analysis”) of the Bergen Water Supply System—a source to tap approach. In: Popovska C, Marsalek J, Mahrikova I, Kukharchyk T, Hlavinek P (eds) Risk Management of Water Supply and Sanitation Systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 73–83

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Roy B (2005) Paradigms and challenges. In: Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrogott M (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys 78. Springer, New York, pp 3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart T (2005) Dealing with uncertainties in MCDA. In: Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrogott M (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys 78. Springer, New York, pp 445–466

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO (2011) Guidelines for drinking-water quality. 4th edition. World Health Organization, Geneva

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study has been carried out within the framework of the TECHENAU project, funded by the European Commission under the 6th framework programme (www.techneau.org), and with support from the Swedish Water & Wastewater Association.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96, Göteborg, Sweden

    Andreas Lindhe, Lars Rosén & Thomas J. R. Pettersson

  2. Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Gothenburg and Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96, Göteborg, Sweden

    Tommy Norberg

  3. SINTEF Building and Infrastructure, Klæbuvegen 153, 7465, Trondheim, Norway

    Jon Røstum

Authors
  1. Andreas Lindhe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lars Rosén
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tommy Norberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jon Røstum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas J. R. Pettersson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Lindhe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lindhe, A., Rosén, L., Norberg, T. et al. Uncertainty modelling in multi-criteria analysis of water safety measures. Environ Syst Decis 33, 195–208 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-013-9442-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-013-9442-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation