Studies and reports in hydrology

44

Recent titles in this series:

5. Discharge of selected rivers of / h e world (English/French/Spanish/Kussian).
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
41.
48.

Volurrie I11 (Part IV): Mean

monthly and extreme discharges (1976-1979). 1985.
Aquifer contarniriu/ion andprotection. 1980. (Also published in French and Arabic.)
Methods of compulalion of the water balance of large lakes and reservoirs. Volume I:Methodolog-v. 1981.
Volume 11: Case studies. 1984.
Application of results from representative and experimental basins. 1982.
Ground water in hard rocks. 1984.
Ground-water models. Volume 1: Concepts, p r o b l e m arid inelhods of analysis with exaiiiples of their
application. 1982.
Sedimentation problems in river basins. 1982. (Also published in French.)
Methods o$ computation o$ low stream flow. 1982.
Pr0ceeding.s of the Leningrad Symposium on specific aspects of hydrological computations for water
projects. 1981. (Russian only.)
Methods of hydrological computations for water projects. 1982. (Also published i n French.)
Hydrological aspects of drought. 1985.
Guidebook to studies of land subsidence due lo ground-water wifhdrawal. 1984.
Guide to the hydrology of carbonate rocks. 1984.
Water and energy: demand and effects. 1985.
Planning and design of drainage bsymslen?s
in urban areas. (2 volumes.) (To be published.)
The process of water resources project planning: a systems approach. 1987.
Ground water problems in coastal areas. 1987.
The role of water in socio-economic development. (To be published.)
Communication strategies for heightening awareness of water. 1987.
Casebook of methods for computing hydrological parameters for water projects. 1987.

The process o f water

resources project planning:
a systems approach
Project A 4.3 of the International
Hydrological Programme
Report prepared by the
Project Team
Editorial Board:
Y. Y. Haimes, Chairman
J. Kindler
E. J. Plate

Unesco

The designations employed and the presentation o f material throughout the publication
do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part o f Unesco concerning the
legal status o f any country, territory, city or area or o f i t s authorities, or concerning
the delimitation of i t s frontiers or boundaries.

Published in 1987 by the United Nations

Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization,
7, place de Fontenoy, 75700 Paris
Printed by
Irnprimerie Bietlot Freres, Fleurus, Belgique
ISBN 92-3- 102476-0

0 Unesco 1987
Prinied in Belgium.

Preface

Although the
total
amount
of
water
o n E a r t h i s g e n e r a l l y assumed
t o have remained v i r t u a l l y c o n s t a n t
during recorded h i s t o r y , periods o f
f l o o d a n d d r o u g h t have c h a l l e n g e d
the intellect
o f man t o h a v e t h e
capacity t o
control
the
water
resources
available
to
him.
Currently,
the
r a p i d growth o f
population,
t o ge th e r
with
'the
e x t e n s i o n o f i r r i g a t e d agriculture
and i n d u s t r i a l
development ,
are
s t r e s s i n g t h e q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y
aspects o f t h e
natural
system.
Because o f t h e i n c r e a s i n g p r o b l e m s ,
man has begun t o r e a l i z e t h a t he can
no l o n g e r f o l l o w a ' u s e a n d d i s c a r d '
p h i l o s o p h y -- e i t h e r w i t h
water
resources
or
any o t h e r n a t u r a l
resource.
As a r e s u l t , t h e need f o r
a consistent policy o f
rational
management o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s has
become e v i d e n t .
Rational
water
management ,
however,
s h o u l d b e f o u n d e d upon a
thorough understanding
of
water
a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d movement.
Thus , as
a contribution
t o the s o l u t i o n o f
t h e w o r l d ' s w a t e r proSlems,
UneScO,
i n 1965,
began t h e f i r s t w o r l d w i d e
programme
of
studies
of
the
-the
hydrological
cycle
International Hydrological
Decade
(IHD).
The r e s e a r c h programme was
complemented by a m a j o r e f f o r t
in
the f i e l d o f hydrological education
an8
training.
The
activities
u n d e r t a k e n d u r i n g t h e Decade p r o v e d
t o b e o f g r e a t i n t e r e s t and v a l u e t o
Member S t a t e s .
By t h e end o f t h a t
p e r i o d a m a j o r i t y o f U n e s c o ' s Member
States
had
f o r m e d IHD N a t i o n a l
Committc'es t o c a r r y o u t t h e r e l e v a n t
national
activities
and
to
participate
in
regional
and
international
co-operation
within
t h e I H D programme.
The k n o w l e d g e o f
the World's water
r e s o u r c e s as an
i n d e p e n d e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l o p t i o n and

facilities for the

training
of
h y d r o l o g i s t s had been developed.
C o n s c i o u s o f t h e need t o e x p a n d
upon t h e e f f o r t s
i n i t i a t e d during
the
International
Hydrological
Decade ,
and ,
following
the
recommendations o f Member S t a t e s ,
UneSCO,
i n 1975,
l a u n c h e d a new
long-term
intergovernmental
programme,
the
International
H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme ( I H P ) ,
to
f o l l o w t h e Decade.
A l t h o u g h t h e IHP i s S a s i c a l l y a
scientific
and
educational
programme,
Unesco has been- a w a r e
from t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a need t o
d i r e c t i t s a c t i v i t i e s toward the
practical solutions o f the world's
v e r y r e a l water resources problems.
Accordingly,
and i n l i n e w i t h t h e
recommendations o f t h e 1977 U n i t e d
Nations
Water
Conference ,
the
objectives o f
the
International
Hydrological
Programme h a v e been
g r a d u a l l y expanded i n o r d e r t o c o v e r
not only
hydrological
processes
considered i n i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h
the
environment
and
human
a c t i v i t i e s , but a l s o t h e s c i e n t i f i c
aspects o f multi-purpose u t i l i z a t i o n
and c o n s e r v a t i o n o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s
t o meet t h e needs o f economic and
social
development.
Thus , w h i l e
maintaining
IHP ' s
scientific
concept, t h e o b j e c t i v e s have s h i f t e d
multiperceptibly
towards
a
disciplinary
approach
to
the
assessment, p l a n n i n g ,
and r a t i o n a l
management o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s .
AS
part
of
Unesco ' s
c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e o b j e c t i v e s Of
t h e IHP, t w o p u b l i c a t i o n s e r i e s a r e
issued:
'Studies
and R e p o r t s i n
H y d r o l o g y ' and ' T e c h n i c a l P a p e r s i n
Hydrology'.
I n addition t o these
publications,
and
in
order
to
e x p e d i t e exchange o f
information,
some w o r k s a r e i s s u e d i n t h e f o r m O f
T e c h n i c a l Documents.

Foreword

T h i s volume
summarizes
the
efforts of
t h e W o r k i n g Group f o r
Project
A.4.3.1
of
Unesco ' s
I n t e r n a t i o n a l H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme
(IHP).
T h i s Working
Group
was
with
evaluating
the
charged
experience
of
countries
i n the
a p p l i c a t i o n i n operations research
techniques
i n t h e implementation o f
water
resource
development
and
management.
I n preparation f o r t h i s study,
a p l a n n i n g s u b c o m m i t t e e f o r t h e IHP
Working
Group
- Y.Y.
Ha i mes
(Chairman),
J.
Kindler,
and
E.
P l a t e - was f o r m e d and f i r s t met i n
P a r i s d u r i n g June 9-12, 1981.
Sorin
Dumitrescu, D i r e c t o r of t h e D i v i s i o n
of
Water
Sc i ences,
and
John
Gladwell,
Project Officer
f o r the
Secretariat,
attended t h i s
first
meeting,
p r o v i d i n g important advice
and i n s i g h t t a t h e s u b c o m m i t t e e .
In
p a r t i c u l a r , Messrs.
D u m i t r e s c u and
Gladwel 1
posed
the
following
q u e s t i o n s t o t h e subcommittee:

(7)

I s there a need for the project

as described, or should i t
m o d i f i e d or abandoned?

(21 What would be the Working Group

produce, and what would be i t s
objectives?

( 3 ) Who would be the audiencels) to

whom
the
products would be
directed?
(41

What products would

useful
(documents,
programmes, seminars,
etc. /?

be
most
training
symposia,

After
an
e x t e n s i ve
deliberation,
the
subcommittee
decided
to
modify
t h e general
statement
of
the
project
and
summarized i t i n t h e p r o j e c t t i t l e -

The Process of Water

Project
Planning:
A
Approach.

Resources
Systems

Furthermore,
t h e subcommittee
recommended t h a t t h e e n t i r e p r o j e c t
r e p o r t s h o u l d be based upon case
h i s t o r i e s of
t h e use o f
systems
a n a l y s i s i n water resources p r o j e c t
planning.
The s u b c o m m i t t e e g e n e r a t e d a
statement o f
g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s
for
the
project
(see
the
I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h i s volume).
In
p r e p a r a t i o n f o r a w o r k s h o p t h a t was
t o be a t t e n d e d b y t h e W o r k i n g Group,
t h e subcommittee prepared a l i s t o f
t h i r t y questions t h a t c o n s t i t u t e d
the basis f o r
t h e p r e p a r a t i o n and
documentation o f
a l l case s t u d i e s .
T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e can be found
in
t h e Append i x .
The f i r s t
meeting
of
the
W o r k i n g Group t o o k p l a c e i n I s r a e l
d u r i n g O c t o b e r 25-30, 1982.
Members
o f t h e W o r k i n g Group
i n attendance
were:
Y.Y.
Haimes
(USA),
J.
Kindler
( P o l a n d / l IASA),
E.
Plate
( F e d e r a l Republ i c o f
Germany) , D .
Rosbjerg
(Denmark),
I.
Dima
(Romania),
and
D.
Howel 1
(Austral ia)
J.
Gladwell
represented
t h e Unesco S e c r e t a r i a t .
The W o r k i n g
Group
elected
Mr.
Ha i mes
as
its
Chairman
and
i n s t r u c t e d t h e p l a n n i n g subcomi t t e e
to
a c t as t h e E d i t o r i a l
Board.
U.
Shamir
F o l l o w i n g t h e meeting,
(Israel)
j o i n e d t h e W o r k i n g Group
f o r m a l l y as an o b s e r v e r .

The n o m i n a l g r o u p
technique
(NGT)
a p p r o a c h was
adopted by t h e
W o r k i n g Group f o r t h e p r e p r a t i o n o f
t h e source m a t e r i a l for t h i s volume.
The
session
began
with
brief
presentations of
the
previously
prepared case s t u d i e s , r e f e r r i n g t o
each
of
the
planning
stages
described i n the Paris r e p o r t o f the
P l a n n i n g Subcommittee.
The NGT t h e n
p r o c e e d e d as f o l l o w s :

1.

The o b j e c t i v e s of each
c h a p t e r were d i s c u s s e d .

proposed

2.

Idea g e n e r a t i o n f o l l o w e d ,
with
each
participant
suggesting
items t h a t s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n
t h e c h a p t e r under d i s c u s s i o n .

3.

B r i e f discussion,
and a g g r e g a t i o n
f o l lowed.

clarification,
of
the
ideas

4.

V o t i n g and r a n k i n g o f t h e
ideas
was t h e n done i n o r d e r t o r e d u c e
t h e number
t o a workable group
f o r the next step.
No i d e a s
were d i s c u s s e d ,
however.
The
concept a t
t h i s s t a g e was o n l y
t o s e l e c t t h e most
important
ideas f o r l a t e r development.

5-

Each p a r t i c i p a n t t h e n w r o t e h i s
the
thoughts
about
each o f
selected
ideas.
The comments
w e r e g r o u p e d b y i d e a so t h a t t h e
p a r t i c i p a n t s had t h e b e n e f i t o f
a l l p r e v i o u s comments, and c o u l d
comment on t h e s e as w e l l .

6.

The comments o n each

typed.

idea

were

The W o r k i n g Group a p p l i e d t h i s
technique t o the f i r s t four planning
s t a g e s and t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r .
The
three-member
Ed i t o r i a1
B o a r d u s e d t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e NGT
w r i t e - u p s and t h e d o c u m e n t a t i o n
of
the
case
studies
(written
in
accordance w i t h
the questionnaire
m e n t i o n e d above)
as t h e b a s i s f o r
the preparation o f the f i r s t d r a f t
of
t h i s volume.
The m a t e r i a l was
m a i l e d t o a l l W o r k i n g Group members
f o r r e v i e w and comments.
The s e v e r a l
members o f
the
W o r k i n g Group met d u r i n g A u g u s t 1983
( i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e IUGG/IAHS
m e e t i ng)
in
Hamburg,
Federal
Republic
o f Germany,
to further
d i s c u s s t h e p r o g r e s s on t h e f i r s t
draft.
I n i t s m e e t i n g d u r i n g J u l y 6-8,
in
Budapest,
Hungary
(in
conjunction with
the International
Federation of
Automatic
Control
the
Ed i t o r i a 1
Board
Congress) ,
g e n e r a t e d t h e second d r a f t o f t h i s
vo 1 ume

1984

F i n a l l y , i n i t s meeting during
1985, i n P a r i s , t h e
June 2 4 - 2 8 ,
Editorial
Board
incorporated the
comments t h a t t h e W o r k i n g Group had
made
on
the
second d r a f t and
draft for
the
completed a f i n a l
Working
Groups
comments
and
approva 1

Only case s t u d i e s
t h a t were
s u b m i t t e d t o t h e E d i t o r i a l Board
in
the
format
suggested
by
the
q u e s t i o n n a i r e h a v e been i n c l u d e d
in
o f t h i s volume ( w i t h
t h e Appendix
t h e e x c e p t i o n o f Case S t u d y 1 0 ) .
In
order not t o inadvertently a l t e r the
message i n t e n d e d b y t h e a u t h o r s o f
t h e case s t u d i e s , no e d i t o r i a l work
has been done o n them.
Therefore,
t h e r e s p e c t i v e a u t h o r s o f t h e case
s t u d i e s , and n o t t h e W o r k i n g Group
or
i t s E d i t o r i a l Board, t a k e c r e d i t
and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e A p p e n d i x .
The W o r k i n g Group e x p r e s s e s i t s
gratitude
for
the
outstanding
i t received i n Israel
hospitality
its
meeting
and
its
during
appreciation f o r
the contributions
of
t h e f o l l o w i n g colleagues from
I s r a e l who p a r t i c i p a t e d
in
the
K o t t , M.
Works hop:
f.Argaman, Y .
Rebhun,
J.
S o r o k a , U.
Shamir, Y .
Bachmat, M.
Ben Z v i ,
Y.
Dreizin,
D.
Alkan,
Y.
Schwarz, Y .
Segev
Waldrnan.
and M.
The c o n t r i b u t i o n s maae b y F .
Rohde
( F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany)
during
the
Workshop
are
also
appreciated.
The E d i t o r i a l B o a r d w o u l d
like
to
a c k n o w l e d g e t h e g u i d a n c e and
support
provided
by
the
I HP
Secretariat
t h r o u g h John G l a d w e l l .
Mr.
Gladwell
followed
in
great
detail
the p r o g r e s s o f t h e Working
Group and o f f e r e d
its
Editorial
Board
i n v a l u a b l e s u g g e s t i o n s and
improvements t h r o u g h o u t t h e d u r a t i o n
of the project.
We a l s o acknowledge
t h e e f f o r t s o f t h e f o l l o w i n g people:
Mrs.
Helene Mantovani
and
Miss
Rouma i n
of
Unesco
Eve 1 yne
Headquarters i n P a r i s f o r t h e i r v e r y
helpful s e c r e t a r i a l assistance; Mrs.
V i r g i n i a Benade o f
Case
Western
Reserve U n i v e r s i t y , Cleveland, Ohio,

for
her
careful
and c o n s t r u c t i v e
editorial
work;
and Mrs.
Mary Ann
P e l o t o f Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e f o r
her
dedication
and
secretarial
assistance
throughout
the entire
project.
T h i s volume
i s addressed t o
water
resource
planners
and
decision-makers i n both developing
is
and
developed c o u n t r i e s .
I t
i n t e n d e d t o be u n d e r s t o o d w i t h o u t
major
prior
knowledge o f w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s t e r m i n o l o g y , and i t c a n be
u s e d a s an a i d f o r u n d e r g r a d u a t e
c o u r s e s on water resources p l a n n i n g
( f o l l o w i n g an i n t r o d u c t o r y c o u r s e on
systems a n a l y s i s ) .
The f o l l o w i n g i s
a complete l i s t o f
a l l members o f
t h e W o r k i n g Group:

D r . Sc. A l f r e d BECKER
l n s t i t u t fur Wasserwirtschaft
DDR-1190 B E R L I N
S c h n e l l e r s t r . 140
German D e m o c r a t i c R e p u b l i c

M r . Ion DlMA
l n s t i t u t pour l a G e s t i o n
des R e s s o u r c e s e n Eau (I.C.P.G.A.)
S p l . l n d e p e n d e i 294
BUCAREST, Romania
P r o f . Yacov Y; HAIMES, Chairman
Systems E n g i n e e r i n g D e p a r t m e n t
Case I n s t i t u t e o f T e c h n o l o g y
Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e U n i v e r s i t y
CLEVELAND, O h i o 44106, USA

D r . D.T. HOWELL
Assistant Professor
U n i v e r s i t y o f S o u t h Wales
New S o u t h Wales
A u s t r a l ia

Dr. Janusz KINDLER

I n s t i t u t e o f Environmental
Eng i n e e r i ng
Warsaw T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y
u l . N o w o w i e j s k a 20
00-653 WARSAW
Po 1 and
M r s . G r a m m a t i k i PAPADOPETROU-TSINGOS
lngenieur C i v i l
S e r v i c e de 1 ' E c o n o m i e de 1 ' E a u
M i n i s t e r e des T r a v a u x P u b l i c s
C h a r i l a o u T r i k o u p i 182
ATH ENES
Grece
P r o f e s s o r E r i c h J. PLATE (PSC)
l n s t i t u t Wasserbau I l l an d e r
U n i v e r s i t a t Karlsruhe
K a i s e r s t r a s s e 12
75 KARLSRUHE 1
F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany

Dr.

Dan ROSBJERG
Associate Professor
T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y o f Denmark
O K - 2 8 0 0 LYNGBY
Denmar k

Observer:
P r o f e s s o r U r i SHAMIR
Department o f C i v i l E n g i n e e r i n g
Technion I s r a e l I n s t i t u t e o f
Technology
T e c h n i o n C i t y , H A I F A 3 2 000
Israel

Contents

Introduction
1.

The Systems Approach in Water Resources Project Planning

1.1
1.2

1.3
1.4
1.5

1.6
1.7

C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p r o j e c t and p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g
Water r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m s and m o d e l s
Levels of decision-making
Stages i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g
The p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s
Advantages and ( c u r r e n t ) d i s a d v a n t a g e s o f t h e s y s t e m s a p p r o a c h
t o water resources
References

2.3
2.4
2.5

2.6
2.7
2.8

2.9
3.

3.2

3.3
3.4

3.5
3.6
3.7

...............................................................................

................................................
..............
....................................
................................................
....................................
...............................
...............................................
....................
.........................................................

Problem f o r m u l a t i o n
Dependency o f p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n o n " n o n - w a t e r " s e c t o r s
Statement o f p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s
Project constraints
A g e n c i e s and p e r s o n n e l i n v o l v e d
S e l e c t i o n and u t i l i z a t i o n o f e x p e r t s
Public p a r t i c i p a t i o n
P r e l i m i n a r y s e l e c t i o n o f systems a n a l y s i s t o o l s
References

Data Collection and Processing

3.1

.............................................................................................

........................................
......................................................
...................................................
...............................................
......................................
...........................................
.........................................................

s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f d a t a needs
D a t a adequacy
Data a c q u i s i t i o n
Data q u a l i t y c o n t r o l
D a t a p r o c e s s i n g and s c r e e n i n g
Data i n f o r m a t i o n systems
References

4. Formulation and Screening of Project Alternatives

4.1

...........................................................

..................
.....................................
.........................................
............................
.....................
............
...............
.........................................
......................................
.........................................................

Overview o f the e v a l u a t i o n o f a l t e r n a t i v e s stages

C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of alternatives
4.3 Generation o f a l t e r n a t i v e s
4.4 Model c r e d i b i l i t y and model c a l i b r a t i o n
4.5 I n t e r a c t i o n between a n a l y s t and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r
4 . 6 C o m p a t i b i l i t y w i t h o t h e r p l a n s and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n
4 . 7 P r o c e d u r e s and t e c h n i q u e s f o r s c r e e n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s
4.8 Use o f h i e r a r c h i c a l a n a l y s i s i n p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n
and s c r e e n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s
4.9 Use o f m u l t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s
4.10 References
4.2

.....

.................................
..........................................
.................................
...............................................
.................................................
.........................................................

2. Plan Initiation and Preliminary Planning

2.1
2.2

.........................................

5
5
6

9
11
13
14
18

23

23
25

25
26
27
28
29
30
32
33
33
34

35
36
37
3E
32

41
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
51

5 . Development of Final Study Results........................................................................................

............................
...................................
..............
..................
...............................................
...............................................
..................
................................
..............................
.............................................
................
.........................................................

The r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n s t a g e s 3 and 4
I n p u t t o and o u t p u t from s t a g e 4
5 . 3 S o u r c e s . q u a l i t y and c a t e g o r i e s o f s t a g e 4 d a t a needs
5 . 4 The r o l e o f m o d e l i n g . s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n
5.5 R i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y
5.6 S e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s
5.7 U n c e r t a i t i e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s
5.8 I m p a c t a n a l y s i s and p o l i c y a n a l y s i s
5.9 M o d e l ( s ) a s p a r t o f t h e s t u d y p r o d u c t
5.10 P l a n n i n g f o r o p e r a t i o n
5.11 Modes o f p r e s e n t i n g t h e p l a n t o t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
5.12 R e f e r e n c e s

5.1
5.2

6 . Developing the Case Studies

6.1
6.2

6.3
6.4

.............................................
..................
.............................
.............................

4.

58
60
61

62
62
63
64
65

67
67
69

72
75

P ' l a n n i n g a System f o r F l o o d P r o t e c t i o n R e s e r v o i r s f o r t h e S u l m Catchment

i n t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany, b y E.J. P l a t e

73

Development o f Water S u p p l y Schemes i n t h e E a s t e r n Neger. I s r a e l .

D e s c r i p t i o n . by D Alkan

91

General

................................................

Long Term I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n i n g o f t h e D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y i n t h e

Bresser
P r o v i n c e o f S o u t h H o l l a n d (The N e t h e r l a n d s ) : IODZH. b y A.H.M.

...

99

P o s t E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n
L e v e l - B S t u d y . b y Y . Y . Haimes. K Sung. L.T. Crook. D G r e g o r k a

......... 113

The P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n k d e l a i d e Water Resources Study

o f June 1978. by D.T. H o w e l l

131

Post E v a l u a t i o n of t h e P l a n n i n g Process i n t h e V i s t u l a River Basin.

P o l a n d . b y 2 Kaczmarek and J K i n d l e r

139

Development o f a Water Resources Management Model f o r t h e Susaa

Catchment i n Denmark. b y D . R o s b j e r g

143

Management o f

1%

............................................

7.

.
9.
8

10

57

77

3.

...................................................................................................

.......................

54
55

............................................................................................................

Appendix II : Case Studies

53

67

The example case s t u d y

I n s t r u c t i o n s used i n f o r m u l a t i n g t h e c a s e s t u d i e s
The p u r p o s e and scope o f t h e q u e s t i o n s
Some c o n c l u s i o n s f r o m t h e case s t u d i e s

Appendix I : The Questionnaire

...................................................................................................

53

I s r a e l ' s Water

..................................

....................................
R e s o u r c e s . by U . Shamir ....................

P r o m o t i o n o f M u l t i p u r p o s e Water Management F a c i l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a
Mare B a s i n . b y P S t e g a r o i u . I D i m a . R A m a f t i e s e i and V V i s a n

........ 1 6 3

A p p l i c a t i o n o f S i m u l a t i o n T e c h n i q u e s i n Water Resources P l a n n i n g i n t h e
German D e m o c r a t i c R e p u b l i c . b y A B e c k e r and D K o z e r s k i

............... 1 7 s

Introduction

The i n t e r n a t i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e o n
water
resources planning
includes
many
applications
of
systems
ana!ysis
and o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h
t e c h n i ques
to
water
resources
projects.
E x c e l l e n t textbooks e x i s t
on v a r i o u s a s p e c t s
(for
example,
Wiener
1972;
Haimes 1977; Goodman
1984; Cohon 1978; Loucks e t a l .
19811, and numerous p r o b l e m methods
are a v a i l a b l e for
f i n d i n g optimum
solutions
or
good
compromises
(Goicocchea e t a l .
1982; Haimes e t
al.
1975).
The need
to
find
optimum
solutions
i n water
resources
is
c o m p e l l i n g indeed.
The more we l o o k
i n t o t h e development
prospects of
any o f
the countries of the world,
t h e more we p e r c e i v e t h a t f u t u r e
growth i s a l m o s t everywhere s e v e r e l y
c o n s t r a i n e d by t h e shortage o f water
o f s u f f i c i e n t q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y ,
a s h o r t a g e which o n l y i n r a r e cases
can
be
overcome b y m a k i n g new
resources a v a i l a b l e .
I n g e n e r a l , we
must make
better
use
of
the
a v a i l a b l e w a t e r , and we must employ
b e t t e r methods f o r
conservation,
d i s t r i b u t i o n , and p u r i f i c a t i o n .
The
s e v e r i t y of t h e s e p r o b l e m s has been
recognized,
and
international
and
n a t i o n a l programmes have h e l p e d t o
disseminate
i n f o r m a t i o n on w a t e r
p r o b l e m s and t o d r a w t h e a t t e n t i o n
o f p u b l i c and p o l i t i c a l
bodies such as t h e Mar d e l
P l a t a Water
C o n f e r e n c e o f t h e UN i n 1977 and t h e
International
D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y
and S a n i t a t i o n Decade Programme - t o
such p r o b l e m s .
S c i e n t i f i c support
programmes
proliferate,
such as
SCOPE,
HOMS,
and
the
Unesco
I n t e r n a t i ona 1
Hydrological
of
these,
Programme.
In
all
optimization
or
systems a n a l y s i s
t e c h n i q u e s a r e w i d e l y recommended.

that,

I t therefore i s strange t o f i n d
in
comparison
with
the

e x t e n s i v e l i t e r a t u r e on t h e methods
o f systems a n a l y s i s , t h e r e h a v e b e e n
of
the successful
few
reports
I t
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f such methods.
seems
t h a t a gap e x i s t s b e t w e e n t h e
s t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t o f systems a n a l y s i s
t e c h n i q u e s and t h e i r c u r r e n t u s e
in
A r e c e n t r e p o r t by Loucks
practice.
et al.
(1984)
has i n d i c a t e d t h a t
o n l y a small p a r t of t h e s t u d i e s o f
water
resources
systems w h i c h
were r e p o r t e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e were
a c t u a l l y used b y t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
f o r whom t h e y w e r e i n t e n d e d .
Since
the published l i t e r a t u r e i s only a
vague
i n d i c a t o r o f what i s g o i n g on
a
i n t h e p r a c t i c i n G r e a l world,
within
the
working
9 r OUP
I n t e r n a t i o n a l H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme
was e s t a b l i s h e d and i t was a s s i g n e d
the task o f
f i n d i n g o u t w h a t has
been t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f
t h e member
countries
t h a t u s e systems a n a l y s i s
techniques.
T h i s group, c a l l e d t h e
Working
Group
on
IHP
Problem
A.4.3.1,
was i n i t i a t e d b y a m e e t i n g
o f t h e p l a n n i n g subcommittee.
The W o r k i n g G r o u p ' s p l a n n i n g
subcommittee, a t i t s f i r s t m e e t i n g
in
Paris
i n 1981,
reviewed the
situation
and
arrived
at
the
conclusion that
i t would n o t be
s u f f i c i e n t t o v i e w t h e success o r
failure of
systems a n a l y s i s i n t h e
o v e r a l l c o n t e x t o f water
resources
management and p l a n n i n g :
t h e group
s h o u l d a l s o i d e n t i f y t h e l e v e l s and
stages o f
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s and
p e r c e i v e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of methods
as s p e c i f i c
t o them.
Only i n t h i s
way c o u l d t h e p r e s e n t p l a c e
of
systems z n a l y s i s
i n the planning
process
be'
recognized
and
a
d i f f e r e n t i a t e d statement
concerning
t h e acceptance o f systems a n a l y s i s
techniques
be
developed.
In
particular,
the
p l ann i ng
subcommittee adopted t h e n o t i o n t h a t
the water resources planning process
addresses,
and m u s t b e r e s p o n s i v e

-2

t o , many a s p e c t s o f w a t e r
resources
planning
(e.g.,
hydrological,
scientific,
technological,
i n s t i t u t i o n a l , and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g ) .
Having accepted t h i s idea, the group
agreed t h a t i t s e f f o r t s h o u l d o f f e r
a framework
t h a t would enable the
quantitative
aspects
of
water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g t o be i n t e g r a t e d
with
the
more
subjective/value
j u d g m e n t and q u a l i t a t i v e a s p e c t s o f
- a
the
decision-making
process
process
influenced
by
political-institutional
trade-offs
and
drifting
with
dynam i c
The
planning
o b j e c t ives
subcommittee
a l s o aGreed o n t h e
following
objectives
of
this
projects:

(1) P r o v i d e a s y s t e m s f r a m e w o r k
for
t h e p l a n n i n g process
i n water
resources development.

(2) C a s t o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h / s y s t e m s
engineering i n t o the context of
a
real-world
water
resources
p l a n n i n g environment.

(3) P r o v i d e

instructional
material
t h a t can b e u s e d t o t e a c h w a t e r
resources planning.

To i l l u s t r a t e t h e b r e a d t h o f
the
water
resources
planning
process,
the
following
representative
premises
were
i d e n t i f i e d t o s e r v e as g u i d a n c e
to
W o r k i n g Group.
Water
r e s o u r c e s systems
most
o f t e n have m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e s ,
u s e , and f u n c t i o n s .
The
consideration
of
the
scientific
and
technological
aspects
of
water
resources
is
a
necessary
p r o b 1 ems
condition
for
a
successful
planning
process,
but
not
sufficient:
institutional
and
other
considerations
are
essential.
M u l t i p l e decision-makers,
who
represent
v a r i ous
constituencies,
needs,
and
aspirations,
are
commonly
involved i n the planning process
and t h u s
should be
properly
accounted f o r i n t h e process.

Elements o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y
c h a r a c t e r i z e most, i f n o t a l l ,
water resources systems.
The
planning
process
hierarchical i n nature,
as
the decision-making process.

is
is

The
components
of
problem
d e f i n i t i o n and f o r m u l a t i o n , d a t a
collection,
and
model i ng
constitute
a
more
dominant
effort
i n the p l a n n i n g process
t h a n t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n p e r se.
The p r o c e s s o f w a t e r
resources
planning
involves experts from
many d i f f e r e n t d i s c i p l i n e s , s u c h
as
h y d r o 1 ogy,
engineering,
economics, p o l i t i c a l and s o c i a l
B a s e d , on t h e s e
concepts,the
planning
subcommittee designed a
general
scheme o f
the
planning
process,identifying
six
stages
ranging from p r o j e c t i n i t i a t i o n t o
management o f t h e c o m p l e t e p r o j e c t .
They
devised
a
set of
thirty
q u e s t i o n s o n t h e s e s t a g e s , and t h i s
questionnaire
was
sent
to a l l
members o f t h e W o r k i n g Group w i t h a
r e q u e s t t o p r e s e n t case s t u d i e s from
their
c o u n t r i e s by answering t h e
questionnaire.
The r e s u l t s o f t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s
a r e found i n t h i s book.
I t s purpose
i s t o d i s c u s s and
explain
the
p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s w i t h emphasis o n
t h e u s e o f s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s , and t o
i l l u s t r a t e t h i s p r o c e s s b y means o f
d i f f e r e n t examples t a k e n f r o m t h e
experiences
of
water
resources
e n g i n e e r s end s c i e n t i s t s f r o m many
different countries.
I n g e n e r a l , we
p e r c e i v e t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as a
sequence
of
decisions
a t many
different
levels
and
by
many
d i f f e r e n t groups o f
experts
and
c o n c e r n e d p e r s o n s whose o b j e c t i v e i s
t o provide a s o l u t i o n or solutions
t o l a r g e - s c a l e problems, i n our case
i n v o l v i n g t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f water
resources.
T h i s p r o c e s s can b e
but
subdivided
into
different
i n t e r r e l a t e d stages,
each w i t h i t s
own c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s u b p r o b l e m s ,
b y means o f .a model o f t h e p l a n n i n g
process,
which provides a general
framework
for
the case
studies,
T h i s general framework i s describe,d

-3-

i n the f i r s t f i v e chapters;
the
the
sixth
chapter
p r o v i des
introduction
t o t h e case s t u d i e s ,
w h i c h a r e appended t o t h e b o o k .
of
the
I n our d e s c r i p t i o n
planning
process,
we
use
t e r m i n o l o g i e s and terms t h a t a r e
understandable
to
e n g i n e e r s and
p l a n n e r s , and t h e d i s c u s s i o n
is
in
general
terms,
leaving analytical
d e t a i l s t o t h e case s t u d i e s o r t o
the l i t e r a t u r e t o which r e f e r e n c e i s
I t i s not
the
made as a p p r o p r i a t e .
purpose
t o p o i n t out a n a l y t i c a l
s o l u t i o n s ; i n d e e d , t h e case s t u d i e s
i l l u s t r a t e why a n a l y t i c a l s o l u t i o n s
may o f t e n n o t be needed.
Naturally
we recommend t h a t systems a n a l y s i s
t e c h n i q u e s and o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h
be u s e d whenever a p p l i c a b l e , b u t we
r e a l i z e t h a t an optimum r e a l - w o r l d
so: u t i o n
does
not
necessar I 1y
c o n s i s t of a s o l u t i o n w h i c h
is,
m a t h e m a t i c a l l y speaking,
the true
optimum.
The r e a l - w o r l d o p t i m u m i s
u s u a l l y t h e compromise s o l u t i o n on
which a l l p a r t i e s
involved
i n the
p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s can a g r e e , and we
in
t h is
book
the
emphas i z e
a n a l y t i c a l aspects of t h i s process.

The p l a n n i n g ' p r o c e s s as h e r e
d e s c r i b e d n o t o n l y encompasses t h e
stages t h a t lead t o the d e s i g n o f
structures
i n a new p r o j e c t ; i t c a n
a l s o b e a p p l i e d t o e x i s t i n g systems
on w h i c h new demands a r e made, o r t o
p r o j e c t s w h i c h have l i t t l e t o d o
with structures,
such as g e n e r a l
water p l a n s o r r e g i o n a l development
plans.
The
p l ann i ng
process
i n c l u d e s many a s p e c t s o f o p e r a t i o n
and
maintenance,
a1 t h o u g h t h e s e
stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g process a r e
n o t d e t a i l e d here.
The book i s n o t
c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and
management s t a g e s
that are p a r t of
any p r o j e c t i n v o l v i n g s t r u c t u r e s and
equipment i n i t s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .
I t
i s hoped t h a t t h i s book w i l l
convey
t o t h e r e a d e r s a sense t h a t t h e
systems a p p r o a c h can p r o v i d e one
w i t h a method b y means o f w h i c h
water
resources planning can be
s t r u c t u r e d and made amenable
to
anal ys i s.
T h i s book
o b j ec t i v e s :

has

the

following

1.

Document
and
evaluate
the
applicability
of
systems
analysis
used
i n the various
stages o f
the water resources
p l a n n i n g process.

2.

C o n t r i b u t e t o t h e development of
a common a p p r o a c h f o r
project
p l a n n i n g i n water resources.

3.

Articulate
problems t h a t
may
systems
defer
a p p l i c a t i o n of
a n a l y s i s and p l a n a c c e p t a n c e ;
and, p e r h a p s , p r o v i d e t h e means
o f o v e r c o m i n g them.

4.

S e r v e as a t e x t b o o k
for
Unesco
courses
on
water
resources
planning.

The q u e s t i o n n a i r e t h a t was p r e p a r e d
f o r e a c h o f t h e p l a n n i n g s t a g e s and
t h a t was u s e d as a g u i d e l i n e f o r t h e
case
studies
is
presented
as
Appendix 1
References
Cohon, J . L .
1978.
Multiobjective
Programming
and
Planning.
Academic P r e s s , New Y o r k .
Goicoechea, A . , D.
Hansen,
and L .
1982. I n t r o d u c t i o n
Duckstein.
t o Multiobjective Analysis w i t h
Engineering
and
Bus i n e s s
Applicatiorls.
W i l e y , New Y o r k .

1984. P r i n c i p l e s o f
Goodman, A . S .
Water
Resources
Planning,
P r e n t i ceHal 1 ,
E n g 1 ewood
C l i f f s , NJ.
Y.Y.
1977.
Hierarchical
Haimes,
Analyses o f
Water
Resources
Systems :
Model i ng
and
Optimization
of
Large-scale
Systems.
M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

W.A.
Hall,
and H.
Haimes, Y.Y.,
Freedman.
1975. M u l t i o b j e c t i v e
O p t i m i z a t i o n i n Water R e s o u r c e s
Systems:
The S u r r o g a t e W o r t h
TradeO f f Method.
Elsevier,
Amsterdam.
Loucks, D.?., J.R.
Stedinger,
and
D.A.
Haith.
1981.
Water
R e s o u r c e s Systems P l a n n i n g and
P r e n t ice
Hal 1 ,
Ana 1 y i s .
Englewood C l i f f s , NJ.

-4-

Loucks,D.P.,
J.R.
S t e d i n g e r , and U .
1984.
Research
in
Shamir.
Water
Resources
and
Environmental P o l i c y Modelling:
Some
historical
perspectives,
current
issues,
and
future
directions.
Natural
Resources
8, h 0 . 3 .
Forum.
Vol.

Wiener, A .
1972. The R o l e o f Water
i n Deve 1 opment
McGraw-Hill,
New Y o r k .

1. The systems approach in water resources project planning

The p r o c e s s o f
bringing
a
project
into
existence
can be
t h o u g h t o f as c o n s i s t i n g o f
three
phases :

Phase 1.

Planning

Stage 1 .
Stage 2 .

3.

Stage

Stage 4.
Stage

5.

P l a n i n i t i a t i o n and
preliminary planning
D a t a c o l l e c t i o n and
processing
Formulation o f
and
s c r e e n i n g and p r o j e c t
alternatives
Development o f
final
project specification
Project design

Phase 2.

Implementation

Phase 3.

Project Operation

The o v e r a l 1 p r o c e s s
i s shown
The
schematically
i n Figure 1.1.
scope o f t h i s book
is
limited to
Phase 1 ,
f o c u s s i n g on t h e p l a n n i n g
o f r e g i o n a l water p r o j e c t s t h a t a r e
initiated
in
response
to
the
s p e c i f i c economic and s o c i a l needs
of
a region or
nation.
These
p r o j e c t s may b e o f a s t r u c t u r a l o r
n o n s t r u c t u r a l c h a r a c t e r : t h e y may b e
of
a singleor multiple-purpose
n a t u r e ; however, t h e i r a n a l y s i s must
always
be
multiobjective
in
character.
Th i s
I S
because
evaluation of
project alternatives
must a l w a y s be c a r r i e d o u t w i t h i n
t h e broad spectrum o f
objectives,
and v a r i o u s p r o j e c t i m p a c t s must b e
the
taken i n t o account.
Phase 1 ,
planning
process,
consists of
a
number o f
stages.
Each o f
these
s t a g e s has a d e f i n i t e f u n c t i o n and
i s s e p a r a t e d more o r l e s s d i s t i n c t l y
i n time from o t h e r stages.
Although
o n l y t h e p l a n n i n g phase and i t s f i v e
stages a r e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s book,
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s needs t o t a k e
c o g n i z a n c e o f Phase 2 and Phase 3
and
use
their
ingredients for
p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g purposes.
These
l a s t two phases, o f
course,
depend
on t h e f i r s t , and t h e y can a l s o l e a d
to future projects.

The
planning
process
is
described
in
this
chapter
as
consisting
of
stages r e l a t e d
to
d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f decision-making.
We b e g i n w i t h
i n t r o d u c t o r y remarks
on t h e n a t u r e o f
water resources
s y s t e m s and t h e i r p l a n n i n g and t h e n
p r e s e n t a g e n e r a l framework f o r t h e
p l a n n i n g process.
The c o n c e p t
of
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s i s summarized
which p r o v i d e s
the
i n Figure 1.1,
s t r u c t u r e for the remaining chapters
o f t h e book.

1.1 Characteristics of water

resources project and
project planning

A water resources p r o j e c t i s a
set o f
s t r u c t u r a l or nonstructural
activities for
the
purpose
of
developing
or
improving e x i s t i n g
water resources f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f
human u s e .
The u l t i m a t e g o a l o f
water
resources
planning
and
management i s t o s e r v e t h e p u b l i c
w e l l - b e i n g - t o ensure t h a t water
will
be a v a i l a b l e ,
in sufficient
q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y , a t t h e r i g h t
l o c a t i o n , and a t t h e r i g h t t i m e , and
t o p r o t e c t human a c t i v i t i e s f r o m t h e
harmful e f f e c t s o f water;
all
this
must b e done w i t h i n a c c e p t e d l e v e l s
o f assurance.
Water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g
is a
l o g i c a l course o f a c t i o n s leading t o
the s e l e c t i o n o f the best acceptable
p r o j e c t i n r e s p o n s e t o an i d e n t i f i e d
need.
Because o f t h e w i d e r e g i o n a l
distribution of
surface water
and
groundwater
resources,
water
resources planning
i s always v e r y
broad
i n scope.
Such
p l a n n i ng
r e q u i r e s t h a t many d i f f e r e n t u s e s o f
water
b e c o n s i d e r e d and e v a l u a t e d ,
leading t o the
articulation
of
trade-offs
among c o n f l i c t i n g and
competing o b j e c t i v e s .
I t requires
that
d e c i s i o n s b e made o n many
different
levels,
ranging
from
n a t i o n a l o r even i n t e r n a t i o n a l w a t e r
plans t o regional or local
projects
and
involving
experts
and
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s who h a v e d i f f e r e n t

-6

b a c k g r o u n d s and who a r e o f t e n n o t
water-cognizant:
politicians,
l a w y e r s , and s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s .
The
o b j e c t i v e s t h a t such a v a r i e d g r o u p
consider
important f o r a p a r t i c u l a r
water
p r o j e c t many
differ
very
widely.
Water
resources planning
therefore
r e q u i r e s a p l a n n i n g team
that
i s well
c o o r d i n a t e d and
in
agreement o n t h e o b j e c t i v e s
and
scope
of
the project,
who c a n
present a f i n a l
project plan that
r e p r e s e n t s t h e agreement o f a l l team
members.
T h i s i s n o t an easy t a s k ,
because w a t e r r e s o u r c e s a r e s u b j e c t
t o natural variations,
and f u t u r e
changes i n demography
a n d economy
This i s a
are d i f f i c u l t to predict.
major
way
that
elements
of
u n c e r t a i n t y e n t e r the process: these
e l e m e n t s a r e e s s e n t i a l , a n d i n many
cases dominant,
f e a t u r e s o f water
p r o j ec t s
Other
compl i c a t i o n s
s p e c i f i c t o water resources p r o j e c t s
a r e due t o t h e f a c t t h a t many w a t e r
are
resources
dec i s i o n s
irreversible.
For i n s t a n c e ,
a dam
t h a t has b e e n b u i l t
in a river
valley exists p r a c t i c a l l y forever,
r e g a r d l e s s o f whether
there
is a
need f o r i t o r n o t ; i t w i l l n e v e r b e
possible t o restore the s i t e t o i t s
o r i g i n a l c o n d i t i o n , even i f s o c i e t y
i s w i l l i n g t o provide funds f o r the
r e m o v a l o f a dam t h a t i s n o l o n g e r
needed.

Because o f
the complexity o f
the
issues
involved
in
water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and because o f
t h e l a r g e consequences t h a t r e s u l t
f r o m d e c i s i o n s on w a t e r p r o j e c t s ,
p l a n n i n g methods m u s t b e employed
which
c a n h a n d l e such p r o b l e m s .
T h i s i s how t h e s y s t e m s a p p r o a c h
enters
the
analysis
of
water
projects.

1.2 Water resources systems and

models

physical
water
resources
systems
i s a c o l l e c t i o n of various
e l e m e n t s - f o r example,
reservoirs,
pipelines,
and o t h e r
structures which i n t e r a c t i n a
l o g i c a l manner
and a r e d e s i g n e d i n r e s p o n s e t o
v a r ious
social
needs.
Water
r e s o u r c e s systems a n a l y s i s
i s an
a p p r o a c h b y w h i c h t h e components o f
a s y s t e m and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s a r e
d e s c r i b e d b y means o f m a t h e m a t i c a l

or
logical
functions.
I n general,
systems a n a l y s i s i s t h e s t u d y o f a l l
t h e i n t e r a c t i o n s o f t h e components.
Very
often
systems a n a l y s i s
is
concerned
with
finding
that
combination of
components
which
g e n e r a t e s an optimum, i . e . , a s y s t e m
which c o n s i s t s o f the b e s t p o s s i b l e
combination
of
elements
for
satisfying the desired objective.
This
statement
should
not
be
i n t e r p r e t e d as r e q u i r i n g t h a t
the
u s e o f s y s t e m models m u s t l e a d t o an
optimum s o l u t i o n i n t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l
sense,
in
which
an
objective
function
i s m i n i m i z e d o r maximized.
Unfortunately,
i n water
resources
s y s t e m s , m o r e emphasis and e f f o r t
h a v e been f o c u s s e d o n o p t i m i z a t i o n
t e c h n i q u e s t h a n o n more r e a l i s t i c
m a t h e m a t i c a l models.
T h e r e a r e two r e a s o n s f o r
the
overemphasis
on
optimization
techniques:
a) Abundant o p t i m i z a t i o n
techniques
are
available
i n f i e l d s other
than
water
resources
e n g i n e e r i n g , such as o p e r a t i o n s
research,
systems e n g i n e e r i n g ,
and c o n t r o l t h e o r y .
b) The
mastery
of
optimization
techniques
requires
far
less
experience,
effort,
and
p r o f e s s i o n a l m a t u r i t y than t h e
of
systems m o d e l i n g .
mastery
C o n s e q u e n t l y , i t has been q u i t e
common
to
apply optimization
techniques t o poorly constructed
models,
which o f t e n represent a
d i s t o r t i o n o f the real physical
s y s t e m and a r e t h u s m i s l e a d i n g i f
n o t erroneous.
There i s a p r e s e n t t r e n d toward
a c h i e v i n g a b e t t e r b a l a n c e between
systems m o d e l i n g and i t s a s s o c i a t e d
o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques.
I f s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s methods a r e
t o b e employed i n t h e s t u d y o f a
water
r e s o u r c e s system, t h e l a t t e r
m u s t s a t i s f y a number o f c o n d i t i o n s .
F i r s t o f a l l , i t must be p o s s i b l e t o
i d e n t i f y the combination o f objects
which
form
the
s y s t e m and t o
separate
them
logically
and
f u n c t i o n a l l y from a l l o t h e r elements
of the planning region.
Thus,
a
bridge
i s t o be seen as an o b j e c t
which

irnnericx

(or t i n e s

not

irnnPdP)

-7-

river flows
i f i t does, i t becomes
part of
t h e s y s t e m o f conveyance
i t leads;
if
channels over which
n o t , i t can be l e f t o u t .
Second, we
must
be
able
t o identify the
e l e m e n t s and be a b l e t o d e s c r i b e
their
functions, i.e.,
t o develop a
p r o c e s s model
for
each component,
and we m u s t b e a b l e t o q u a n t i f y
their
relations with
the
other
e l e m e n t s o f t h e system.
T h i r d , one
has t o b e a b l e t o combine a n d / o r
c o o r d i n a t e component models and t o
d e f i n e o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s i n such a
way t h a t
the objectives
to
be
o p t i m i z e d can be expressed i n terms
o f t h e systems v a r i a b l e s .
Systems a n a l y s i s may b e u s e d t o
f i n d a "best
acceptable"
solution.
But t h i s
i s n o t i t s o n l y purpose.
O f ten
it
is
applied
for
" s t r u c t u r i ng"
a
water
resources
project.
By s t r u c t u r i n g i t i s meant
t h a t t h e systems e l e m e n t s a r e drawn
i n t o a b l o c k d i a g r a m and c o n n e c t e d
b y means o f
logical
statements.
When a s y s t e m i s r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e
f o r m o f such a diagram, i t i s e a s i e r
t o "see"
how d i f f e r e n t components
must i n t e r a c t f o r
t h e system t o
p e r f o r m p r o p e r l y , o r how t h e system'
i n t e r a c t s w i t h i t s environment.
By
i s o l a t i n g subsystems o f
the water
r e s o u r c e s system, t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e
can
be
tested
and
analyzed
separately.
I n t h i s manner,
the
systems a p p r o a c h g i v e s t r a n s p a r e n c y
to
the
planning
process
and
s i m p l i f i e s the discussion on a l l
levels
of
the
decision-making
process;
and
i t easily permits
a d d i t i o n or d e l e t i o n o f d i f f e r e n t
components o r i n t e r a c t i o n s .

is
The
systems
approach
especially
u s e f u l when a p r o j e c t
becomes so l a r g e t h a t i t c a n n o t b e
c o n s i d e r e d as a u n i t , n e c e s s i t a t i n g
i t s decomposition (disaggregation).
I n contemporary p r o j e c t s ,
systems
a r e so l a r g e o r complex t h a t t h e y
can o n l y be a n a l y z e d w i t h t h e a i d of
computers.
These a r e needed because
of
the
complexity
of
the
r e l a t i o n s h i p s - f o r example, dynamic
systems
that
have
non1 i near
i n t e r a c t i o n s - o r because o f t h e
m u l t i t u d e of
purposes o r p o s s i b l e
c o m b i n a t i o n s o f systems e l e m e n t s , o r

because o f
t h e need t o i n c o r p o r a t e
stochastic v a r i a b i l i t y
into
the
s y s tern
ana 1 y s i s .
Within
the
framework o f c o m p u t e r - a i d e d
systems
analysis,
the
planner
has
to
recognize the existence o f
(i)

multiple constituencies

( i i)

m u l t i p l e decision-makers
many
levels
of
hierarchical structure

at
the

that are
( i i i ) multiple objectives
noncommensurable and a r e o f t e n
i n c o n f l i c t and/or c o m p e t i t i o n
(iv)

m u l t i p l e purposes and/or
uses
o f t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s system

(v)

elements
of
uncertainties

risk

and

These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i c t a t e
t h a t t h e p l a n n i n g team b e composed
of
experts
who
represent
the
multidisciplinary/interdisciplinary
nature
of
the
issues
being
considered.
However,
systems a n a l y s i s
is
n o t an a p p r o a c h
t h a t can be used
automatically
and w i t h o u t t h i n k i n g .
Usually, the greatest e f f o r t o f
the
a n a l y s t i s t o reduce t h e system t o a
manageable
representation without
destroying
i t s essential
features
and r e l a t i o n s h i p s .
The a n a l y s t may
overlook
important
relationships
b e c a u s e he may l a c k a c c e s s t o a l l
n e c e s s a r y d a t a , and u s u a l l y t i m e
is
n o t s u f f i c i e n t i n an a c t u a l p l a n n i n g
environment t o develop t h e
ideal
it to its fullest
model and t e s t
extent or
to subject
i t t o the
s c r u t i n y o f several experts.
T y p i c a l models i n c l u d e process
models,
i.e.,
m a t h e m a t i c a l models
which
describe the physical
and
o t h e r processes symbolized by system
elements:
input-output
models o f
w a t e r q u a n t i t y and w a t e r q u a l i t y
parameters f o r
rivers,
reservoirs,
groundwater,
and
distribution
systems,
such as p i p e - l i n e s
and
Process
m o d e l s c a n be
cana 1 s .
considered as r e p r e s e n t i n g p u r e l y
s t a t i c r e l a t i o n s , such a s t h e r i v e r
stage-discharge
relationship,
or

-8-

t h e y c a n r e p r e s e n t dynamic p r o c e s s e s
such
as
the
outflow
-from
a
reservoir,
or the motion o f a f l o o d
wave i n t h e r i v e r c h a n n e l .
These
models
i n their
usual form a r e o f
the deterministic kind,
but within
t h e framework o f systems a n a l y s i s i t
might
be
necessary
t o consider
stochastic
or
non-deterministic
aspects,
s u c h a s t h o s e due t o t h e
time v a r i a b i l i t y
of
the
runoff
p r o c e s s or t h e random n a t u r e o f t h e
runoff
coefficients.
The p r o c e s s
are
often
part
of
mode 1 s
c o n v e n t i o n a l d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e s and
therefore
are f a m i l i a r t o planning
But s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s , i n
engineers.
addition,
employs o t h e r
types o f
models,
such as d e c i s i o n models.
O p t i m i z a t i o n m o d e l s , such as
linear
p r o g r a m m i n g , dynamic programming, o r
the
surrogate
worth
trade-off
method,
are
important tools
and
procedures
for
solving decision
problems by o p t i m i z a t i o n .
Other
decision
models
may
not
use
optimization
techniques,
such
as
many s i m u l a t i o n m o d e l s .
The d r i v i n g
force
in
the
o p t i m i z a t i o n models i s t h e o b j e c t i v e
function
(or
f u n c t ions
in
multiobjective optimization),
and
any " o p t i m a l "
sblution derived i s
c l e a r l y dependent on t h e assumptions
and c r i t e r i a and t h e i r a s s o c i a t e d
uncer t a i n t i es.
Some
of
these
u n c e r t a i n t i e s might be derived from
the
s e l e c t i o n o f model
topology
(structure),
parameters
( c o e f f i c i e n t s ) , scope,
or
focus.
Others m i g h t be r e l a t e d t o data, t h e
o p t im i z a t i o n
t e c h n i ques
used t o
solve
the
mathematical
models,
modular
subjectivity,
or
the
inabillty
t o account
i n t h e model
f o r many o f t h e n o n q u a n t i t a t i v e and
nontangible considerations.
These
factors
and o t h e r s ,
such as t h e
s e n s i t i v i t y o f t h e m o d e l s and t h e i r
stability,
have
somehow
caused
s k e p t i c i s m about o p t i m i z a t i o n models
and s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s
in
general
among t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r s o f w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management.
The
term
optima!
solution
essentially
refers t o
the
best
solution of
t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l model
assumpt i ons
and
under
al1

constraints,
whether
explicitly
s t a t e d or i m p l i c i t l y included i n the
formulation.
Clearly,
then,
the
optimal
solution
i n d i c a t e d by t h e
model may be f a r from, o r even have
nothing
t o do w i t h ,
the actual
system's optimal solution.
a1 1
these
Recogn i z i n g
difficulties,
mathematical
models
have
significantly
expanded t h e
a b i l i t y t o understand,
plan,
and
manage our w a t e r r e s o u r c e s .
Models
are currently
used t o i n v e s t i g a t e
of
water
v i r t u a l l y every
type
resource problem,
for
smalland
large-scale
s t u d i e s and p r o j e c t s ,
and
at
a1 1
levels
of
decision-making.
I n some c a s e s ,
m o d e l s have i n c r e a s e d t h e a c c u r a c y
of
estimates o f f u t u r e events t o a
1eve 1 f a r beyond " b e s t
j udgement"
decisions.
I n o t h e r cases,
they
h a v e made p o s s i b l e a n a l y s e s t h a t
c o u l d n o t b e performed e m p i r i c a l l y
or w i t h o u t
computer
assistance.
it
Further,
models
have
made
feasible
t o q u a n t i t a t i v e l y compare
the l i k e l y effects of
alternative
resource decisions.
Models a r e u s u a l l y v e r y u s e f u l
f o r a n a l y z i n g complex w a t e r r e s o u r c e
While
many
of
the
p r o b 1 ems.
economic and s o c i a l f a c t o r s i n w a t e r
resoures p l a n n i n g cannot be f u l l y
enumerated, m o d e l s can b e used t o
i n t e g r a t e t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a and
provide estimates o f f u t u r e e f f e c t s
and a c t i v i t i e s .
Such e s t i m a t e s a r e
highly
useful
i n evaluating the
consequences
of
different
a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s , and u s i n g them i s
o f t e n less expensive than conducting
comprehensive surveys o r u s i n g o t h e r
t r a d i t i o n a l approaches.
A prerequisite for
a systems
a n a l y s i s i s t h a t a l l t h e elements o f
t h e system c a n be m o d e l e d e i t h e r
I t is
a n a l y t i c a l l y or c o n c e p t u a l l y .
important t o d i s t i n g u i s h
between
A model i s t h e
s y s t e m and m o d e l .
mathemat i c a l
and/or
physical
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m and o f
t h e r e l a t i o n s between t h e e l e m e n t s
o f t h e system.
I t i s an a b s t r a c t i o n
of
the r e a l world,
and,
i n any
p a r t i c u l a r application, the q u a l i t y
of
t h e model
and t h u s o f systems

-9-

a n a l y s i s depends o n how w e l l
the
model b u i l d e r p e r c e i v e s t h e a c t u a l
r e l a t i o n s h i p s and how w e l l
he i s
able to describe t h e i r functional
f orm.
S i n c e models a r e a b s t r a c t i o n s
of
reality,
t h e y do n o t u s u a l l y
describe
all
features
that are
encompassed
by
a
real-world
situation.
A prerequisite for
the
systems
analysis
of
a
water
r e s o u r c e s system i s t h e d e s c r i p t i o n
of
t h e s y s t e m i n t e r m s o f component
models w h i c h p e r m i t s o l u t i o n s t o b e
obtained
a t r e a s o n a b l e c o s t and
w i t h i n a prescribed time
frame.
Therefore,
t h e model b u ' i l d e r s h o u l d
n o t a t t e m p t t o model t h e r e a l i t y o f
individual
components as c l o s e l y as
p o s s i b l e , b u t o n l y as c l o s e l y as
is
necessary
to
meet
the overall
accuracy
requirements
for
his
s y s tern
To i l l u s t r a t e :
i f the
o b j e c t i v e i s the design o f a l a r g e
s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r f o r i r r i g a t i o n and
water
supply,
it
is
quite
u n n e c e s s a r y t o model
the complete
r u n o f f process.
On t h e o t h e r hand,
a model w e l l - s u i t e d
for
a storage
reservoir,
such
as
a
monthly
f l o w - g e n e r a t i o n model,
is entirely
u n s u i t e d f o r model i ng
the
peak
discharges;
When,
f o r example,
s h o u l d t h e e n g i n e e r who d e s i g n s a
sanitary
sewer
system f o r
a city
employ a model o f n o n s t a t i o n a r y f l o w
r o u t i n g ( s u c h as t h e c o m p l e t e S t .
Venant e q u a t i o n s ) ,
and when i s i t
s u f f i c i e n t t o design for
stationary
flows,
for
example,
by
just
employing t h e concept o f
normal
d e p t h a n d M a n n i n g ' s e q u a t i o n ? The
d i f f e r e n c e i n computer t i m e f o r
the
two methods i s v e r y l a r g e , and t h e
s t a t e d q u e s t i o n i s a v a l i d one.
important
Hence, i t seems t h a t an
a s p e c t o f model
building i n the
context o f
systems a n a l y s i s i s t o
find the
best
but
permissible
simplifications.
Other r e a s o n s f o r
s e a r c h i n g f o r a s i m p l e model may b e
imposed b y a l a c k o r low q u a l i t y o f
data.
For example, a n o n l i n e a r u n i t
h y d r o g r a p h model
i s usually
not
u s e f u l because t h e v a r i a b i l i t y o f
the r u n o f f c o e f f i c i e n t together w i t h
the lack o f s u f f i c i e n t
parallel
measurements o f r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f
impossible t o get
e v e n t s make i t

calibrations
that
are
accurate
enough
t o make t h e n o n l i n e a r i t y
p e r c e p t i b l e i n a s t a t i s t i c a l sense.
I n a recent study
commissioned
by
the
Office
of
Technology
Assessment o f t h e Congress o f
the
(U.S.
OTA 1982), a
United States
group o f
l e a d i n g e x p e r t s assessed
the c a p a b i l i t y o f surface-water flow
and
s u p p l y models,
surface-water
models, and g r o u n d w a t e r m o d e l s ,
the
latter
i n c l u d i n g b o t h q u a l i t y and
q u a n t i t y aspects.
They were
rated
a c c o r d i ng
to
two
criteria:
reliability
of
the
model
and
credibility of
t h e model
results.
Models a r e c o n s i d e r e d
reliable if
they
accurately
describe
the
physical or
chemical
process f o r
which they a r e designed.
Credible
results require both a
reliable
model
and s u f i c i e n t d a t a t o run i t .
Tables 1.1,
1.2, and 1 . 3 ( w h i c h a r e
c o p i e s f r o m T a b l e s 2 , 3 , and 4 o f
t h e OTA r e p o r t ) show t h e assessment
for
t h e t h r e e t y p e s o f models.
The
e v a l u a t i o n key
is
l i s t e d a t the
bottom of the table.
I t i s seen
from Table
1.1
that the experts
consider
s u r f a c e - w a t e r m o d e l s t o be
genera 1 1 y
adequate,
a 1 though
c o n s i d e r a b l e improvement i s p o s s i b l e
t o r a i s e most o f t h e m o d e l s f r o m a C
ranking i n t o the A class.
Roughly
t h e same s t a t e o f a f f a i r s i s l i s t e d
f o r t h e s u r f a c e - w a t e r q u a l i t y models
and f o r g r o u n d w a t e r m o d e l s ,
but
it
must be r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e r a t i n g by
c r e d i b i l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y a l o n e ,
w i t h o u t d u e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f economy
and p o s i t i o n i n t h e c o n c e p t u a l f r a m e
of
t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m s , may
n o t be s u f f i c i e n t f o r assessing t h e
m o d e l s ' v a l u e f o r systems a n a l y s i s .

1.3

Levels of decision-making

Many w a t e r
resource p r o j e c t s
a r e v e r y l a r g e , and
l a r g e sums o f
money,
very
often
public,
are
involved.
They a r e c o m p e t i n g w i t h
other
needs f o r
s o c i e t y , and t h e y
i n f l u e n c e many o t h e r s e c t o r s o f
the
structure of
society.
Therefore,
t h e d e c i s i o n process which leads t o
the
implementation
of
a
water
resources p r o j e c t t a k e a long t i m e
and d e c i s i o n s
a r e made o n
levels
po 1 i t i ca 1
and
which
are

-10-

socioeconomic r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l .

The b a s i s f o r a d e c i s i o n on a
water resources p r o j e c t i s a p l a n i n
which the o b j e c t i v e s o f the p r o j e c t
a r e o u t l i n e d as w e l l as t h e means b y
w h i c h t h e y a r e t o be accomplished,
t h e i r c o s t s , and t h e consequences o f
t h e p r o j e c t i n t e r m s o f b e n e f i t s and
adverse
impacts.
Water
resources
planning
is
the
sum
of
all
a c t i v i t i e s which
l e a d t o such a
plan.
The
larger
t h e p r o j e c t and
t h e more i n t e n s i v e t h e use o f
the
w a t e r r e s o u r c e s , t h e b r o a d e r becomes
t h e scope o f t h e p l a n n i n g process.
There a r e
few
water
resources
projects
which
have o n l y
local
consequences, and most o f them h a v e
t o b e seen i n t h e b r o a d e r c o n t e x t o f
regional
or
even
national
or
It is
i n t e r n a t i o n a l development.
therefore
tempting
t o evolve a
hierarchy of
levels
for
water
resources
planning,
with
the
h i e r a r c h y b e g i n n i n g a t a l e v e l where
a l 1 possible projects are considered
i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a g e n e r a l economic
master
plan for
a country.
Of
course,
a p l a n which comprises a l l
political,
econom i c ,
and
s o c i o l o g i c a l development o b j e c t i v e s
in detail
i s neither
useful
nor
manageable.
Therefore,
a national
w a t e r p l a n must g e n e r a t e s u b p l a n s ,
which
c o v e r more d e t a i l s f o r
a
narrower area.
T y p i c a l o f such a h i e r a r c h y o f
planning
i s a d i v i s i o n into three
for
example,
levels.
I n the U.S.,
t h e f o l l o w i n g l e v e l s a r e promulgated
Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l
by the U.S.

(1973)

(i)

Level
A,
a
reconnaissance
a g e n e r a l framework
study or
study.
The t e m p o r a l
horizon
The
i s a b o u t 30 t o 50 y e a r s .
major purpose i s t o
identify
major
problems o r p r o s p e c t i v e
The
area
is
p r o b 1 ems.
generally very large.
1

(ii)

Level
B i s a comprehensive
planning e f f o r t f o r a smaller
region.
This
level
should
f o l l o w L e v e l A , where p r o b l e m s
have a l r e a d y been i d e n t i f i e d .
The
t i m e h o r i z o n i s a b o u t 15
years.

( i i i ) Level
C
is
implementation
planning,
where
specific
p r o j e c t designs a r e developed.
C should
General l y ,
Level
B,
because
follow
Level
specific
plans
or
recommendations
f rom
the
L e v e l - B e f f o r t a r e implemented
here.
Other c o u n t r i e s u s e d i f f e r e n t
terminologies
to
describe
the
planning l e v e l s , b u t i n general
one
c a n i d e n t i f y t h r e e l e v e l s , and t h e s e
are often associated w i t h d i f f e r e n t
planning authorities.
The
first
1 eve 1
i n v o 1 ves
international
of
water
use,
for
agreements
example,
the a l l o c a t i o n o f water
f r o m a r i v e r w h i c h f l o w s t h r o u g h two
o r more c o u n t r i e s .
A t t h i s level,
n a t i o n a l water plans a r e a d j u s t e d t o
international
demands.
These
agreements a r e h a r d l y e v e r r e a c h e d
on t h e b a s i s o f w a t e r
resources
development a l o n e , b u t i n v o l v e many
different national interests.
The second
i s the
national
level.
The
purpose
of
water
r e o u r c e s p l a n n i n g on t h i s l e v e l i s
t o set p r i o r i t i e s for the
long-term
development
of
a
country.
An
example i s t h e N a t i o n a l Water
Plan
1977).
of
Hungary
(David e t a l .
I t s decision
level
is
largely
political
and
involves
technical
l i m i t e d scale,
i n p u t s only on a
u s u a l l y o n l y as f i n a n c i a l
data or
constraints.
Although d e c i s i o n s on
a national or
international
level
a r e o f g r e a t consequence s i n c e t h e y
s e t t h e s t r a t e g y f o r development, i n
t h i s book t h e y a r e n o t g i v e n much
room.
A t these l e v e l s i t i s o f t e n
d e c i d e d whether t o proceed w i t h t h e
p l a n n i n g f o r a p r o j e c t , and w h e t h e r
t o make f u n d s ( d i r e c t f i n a n c i n g o r
matching funds)
available for it.
The p r o c e d u r e s f o r p l a n n i n g on t h e
national
level d i f f e r for d i f f e r e n t
countries,
and some d e t a i l s
are
g i v e n i n the i n t r o d u c t o r y s e c t i o n o f
e a c h o f t h e appended c a s e s t u d i e s .
The t h i r d
level
i s regional,
i t s results being incorporated i n t o
a
regional
water
plan
which
i d e n t i f i e s water resources p r o j e c t s
w i t h i n the c o n t e x t o f t h e d i f f e r e n t
requirements
imposed b y a l t e r n a t e

-11-

development p l a n s o f a r e g i o n .
The
(Case
Maumee R i v e r s t u d y i n t h e USA
o r t h e Marchfeld case i n
Study 4)
A u s t r i a (Nachtnebel
et al.
1982)
a r e examples o f
such b r o a d - s c a l e
r e g i o n a l water plans.
The o b j e c t i v e
o f such a s t u d y i s t o s e t p r i o r i t i e s
and t o make recommendations f o r t h e
allocation
of
different
water
resources t o d i f f e r e n t water u s e r s .

1.4 Stages in water resources

planning
The systems d e f i n i t i o n s o f
the
previous section are applicable t o
different
types
of
planning
p r o c e s s e s and t h e y a r e n o t s p e c i f i c
t o water
r e s o u r c e s systems.
This
l i e s i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e systems
approach,
and i n c l a s s i f y i n g w a t e r
resources
systems
we
have
to
recognize b o t h t h e general aspects
of a l l
systems and t h e s p e c i f i c
aspects of water
resources.
Most
t y p i c a l o f t h e l a t t e r i s t h e use o f
classification
by
purpose.
The
purpose of a water r e s o u r c e s system
may be w a t e r s u p p l y ,
irrigation,
flood
control,
hydropower
generation, or navigation:
or
some
or a l l
of
t h e s e p u r p o s e s may b e
combined i n m u l t i p u r p o s e p r o j e c t s .
In
the
systems framework,
this
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s not very useful
because t h e systems models f o r t h e s e
purposes a r e v e r y s i m i l a r i n t h e i r
formal
aspects.
The
major
differences
lie
in
constraints
(which a r i s e f r o m r e s t r i c t i o n s on
i n d i v i d u a l purposes),
in objective
functions
(with d i f f e r e n t societal
and economic g o a l s
t o be a c h i e v e d
for
d i f f e r e n t p u r p o s e s ) , and i n t h e
design aspects.

A second c l a s s i f i c a t i o n
i s by
stages o f
t h e t i m e sequence o f t h e
p l a n n i n g process.
The scope o f
the
p l a n n i n g process i n water r e s o u r c e s
can v a r y f r o m t h e v e r y b r o a d - b a s e d
a water
preliminary
planning of
resources p r o j e c t , which f o l l o w s t h e
p a r t i a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a need f o r
action,
to
the
more
detailed
evaluation o f a selected physical
project
(a " f e a s i b i 1 i t y "
study).
The p r o j e c t may b e f i n a n c e d
or
s u p p o r t e d by p r i v a t e p a r t i e s , o r i t
may be p a r t o f
a
large-scale,

i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y financed a c t i v i t y ,
a l t h o u g h i n t h i s book emphasis i s o n
planning e f f o r t s a t a national or
regional scale.
Thus, when we s e t
up a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n by stages o f t h e
i t m u s t be b r o a d
planning process
incorporate
and f l e x i b l e enough t o
of water
all
these
properties
r e s o u r c e s p r o j e c t s and t o p e r m i t
a n a l y s i s b y any s u i t a b l e s y s t e m s
A
analysis
t e c h n ique.
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n which
makes
this
possible
i s p r e s e n t e d i n t h i s book
and i s d e p i c t e d i n F i g u r e 1 . 1 .
I t
i d e n t i f i e s the f o l l o w i n g stages o f
t h e p l a n n i n g process:
Stage 1:
The p r o j e c t
initiation
stage, which begins w i t h t h e
statement
of
needs
and
i nc 1 udes
prel i m i nary
p l a n n i n g t h a t ends w i t h
the
d e c i s i o n o n how t o p r o c e e d .
Stage 2:
The
data
collection
stage,
i n which data a r e
gathered f o r
s y s t e m model
development
and
decision-making.
Stage

The
process
of
3:
the
final
determ n i n g
in
p r o j ec
configuration,
which a l l a l t e r n a t i v e s are
small
i n v e s t g a t e d and a
number o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e a n d
p r o m i s ng a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e
select d
for
d e t a i 1 ed
analysis.

The p r o c e s s o f p l a n n i n g
S t a g e 4:
i n detail.
I n t h i s stage,
the
design
parameters,
operation
rules,
cost ,
benef i t s ,
etc.,
of
the
alternatives
selected
in
Stage 3 a r e determined,
and
the
final
project
configuration
i s selected.
T h i s phase r e p e a t s , i n more
s p a t i a l and t e m p o r a l d e t a i l ,
t h e p l a n n i n g o f S t a g e s 2 and
3, and o f t e n i s p e r f o r m e d b y
a
different
team
of
planners.
Stage

5:

The d e s i g n s t a g e ,
in
which
the
final
configuration i s translated
i n t o d e s i g n documents.

-12-

Note t h a t Stage 5
i s not a
direct
p a r t o f t h e water resources
i t mostly
p l a n n i n g process,
since
i n v o 1v e s
structural
and
other
if
a
project
is
of
details,
s t r u c t u r a l nature.
I n many p r o j e c t s
which a r e n o n s t r u c t u r a l , t h i s stage
the
does n o t e x i s t , f o r example, i f
changes o f f u n c t i o n s f o r an e x i s t i n g
p r o j e c t a r e analyzed.
We t h e r e f o r e
s h a l l not d i s c u s s Stage 5 i n t h i s
book.
This classification
into five
stages
i s o n l y one o f many s i m i l a r
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and i s n o t t h e o n l y
one w h i c h
i s i n general use.
For
example
in international
project
p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s s u c h as t h e ones
u s e d b y t h e W o r l d Bank o r o t h e r
project
planning
and
financing
agencies for developing c o u n t r i e s , a
g r o u p i n g by stages
i s used w h i c h
e s s e n t i a l l y combines S t a g e s 2 and 3
into a prefeasibility
study,
which
f orms
the
basis
for
funding
d e c i s i o n s , and w h i c h a l s o combines
some a s p e c t s o f S t a g e s 2 and 4 i n t o
a f e a s i b i l i t y study
that provides
the basis for
the f i n a l financial
d e c i s i o n s t h a t a r e made b e f o r e t h e
project
i s d e s i g n e d and e x e c u t e d .
However,
most
national
projects
subdivide
themselves
into
five
stages
i n a n a t u r a l manner, s i n c e
each s t a g e i n v o l v e s d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
and a n a l y s t s .
The s t a g e s o f
the
planning
p r o c e s s encompass p l a n n i n g a t each
o f the l e v e l s described i n section
1.5.
B u t , whereas t h e l e v e l s r e f e r
mostly
to
the
decision-making
agencies,
t h e s t a g e s a r e seen more
f r o m t h e l o g i c o f systems a n a l y s i s .
There e x i s t ,
therefore,
important
differences.
However,
l e v e l s and
stages
form
a
network o f
the
d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s , and t h e y
interact
and
are strongly
interdependent.
This
requi res
a
structured
administration
i n which,
at all
l e v e l s and s t a g e s , a u t h o r i t i e s
(and
responsibilities)
are
a s s i gned,
procedures o f
i n f o r m a t i o n exchange
of
legal
actions
are
and
established,
and
procedures
of
i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h the users o f
a
water
resources
project
are
developed.
D i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s have

generated a d m i n i s t r a t i v e procedures
of
different
kinds,
as
is
exemplified
i n t h e case s t u d i e s .
O t h e r examples a r e g i v e n f o r v a r i o u s
c o u n t r i e s b y Jamieson
(19791,
by
W i 1 1 iams
(1984) f o r
the
United
Kingdom, and b y Shamir
(1983)
for
Israel

I n terms o f water
resources
p l a n n i n g and o p e r a t i o n ,
a country
may be c o n s i d e r e d d e v e l d p e d i f i t
has an
administrative
structure
which guarantees ' c a r e f u l o p e r a t i o n
and m a i n t e n a n c e o f c o m p l e t e d systems
and w h i c h has s u f f i c i e n t f l e x i b i l i t y
to
adjust
to
changing
needs.
Indeed, a good case c a n b e made f o r
assigning a high p r i o r i t y t o the
establishment o f a w e l l - f u n c t i o n i n g
water
administration with strong
powers
of
regulation
and
a
well-trained
maintenance
staff,
g i v i n g i t a much h i g h e r p r i o r i t y
than the p r o d u c t i o n o f a large-scale
project.
C o u n t r i e s t h a t have an
already-developed
water
resources
administration
that could
evolve
w i t h the advent o f large-scale water
p r o j e c t s h a v e c e r t a i n l y been i n a
more f o r t u n a t e p o s i t i o n .
They have
been more aware o f t h e consequences
and l i m i t a t i o n s o f w a t e r
resources
projects than countries w i t h 1 i t t l e
o r no a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e w h i c h
s u d d e n l y have been c o n f r o n t e d w i t h
t h e task o f
a d m i n i s t e r i n g a huge
water p r o j e c t fashioned through the
w i l l o f well-meaning
politicians,
the finances
o f an i n t e r n a t i o n a l
f u n d i n g agency,
t h e p l a n n i n g o f an
international consultant f i r m ,
and
the
construction
crews
of
a
multinational contractor!

A well-designed
plan for
a
water
resources
project
should
r e q u i r e t h e e x e c u t i o n o f each o f t h e
stages,
a l l o w i n g enough t i m e and
r e s o u r c e s i n f u n d i n g and manpower t o
p r o v i d e a s o l i d base f o r d e c i s i o n .
U n f o r t u n a t e l y , such a c a r e f u l
study
of
a
project
is
usually not
possible,
sometimes
because
of
l i m i t e d f u n d s b u t more o f t e n due t o
time
limitations.
Partly this is
caused by t h e l a c k o f
data:
e.g.,
l o n g records of r u n o f f d a t a t h a t a r e
based on a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t
number
of
years
of
runoff

-13-

measurement a r e o f t e n n o t a v a i l a b l e ,
and measurement o f l a c k i n g d a t a c a n
only s t a r t during o r a t best s h o r t l y
before planning.
I n e a r l i e r times,
a
t h e p l a n n i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f
large water
p r o j e c t took decades,
during which time additional
data
could
be
gathered.
But today,
particularly
in
developing
c o u n t r i e s , t h e d a t a base does n o t
exist,
and t h e t i m e h o r i z o n i s so
short t h a t the planner finishes
his
j o b o n l y j u s t b e f o r e the c o n t r a c t o r
takes o v e r .
Even i f t h e p l a n n e r c a n
continue the data-gathering
phase
d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n , methods a r e so
efficient
that
the
project
is
c o m p l e t e d i n a few y e a r s i n s t e a d o f
decades.
Population pressure or
n a t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s a l s o may
impose t i m e c o n s t r a i n t s .
The n e t
r e s u l t i s t h a t S t a g e 2 o f t e n i s done
o n l y on a l i m i t e d s c a l e , and i s done
as p a r t o f S t a g e s 3 and 4 .
Other
cases e x i s t w h i c h may
make S t a g e 4 u n n e c e s s a r y because t h e
one s o l u t i o n o f t h e w a t e r
resources
project
i s obvious or,
as i s t h e
case
i n many
densely
populated
countries
( f o r example, i n W e s t e r n
E u r o p e ) , t h e r e e x i s t many t y p e s o f
projects
which
a r e so n a r r o w l y
c o n s t r a i n e d by d i f f e r e n t
interests
that a p a r t i c u l a r option i s the only
f e a s i b l e one.

1.5 The planning process

The d e f i n i t i o n o f
the
five
stages
of
planning
yields
a
conceptual
model
of
the p l a n n i n g
p r o c e s s , w h i c h i s shown i n F i g u r e
1.1.
H e r e , t h e s t a g e s a r e shown as
a
sequential
decision
p a r t of
process,
i n which
t h e t a s k s t o be
executed
in
each
stage
are
represented
by
boxes
and
the
connecting l i n e s denote decisions t o
be t a k e n ,
or
the information flow
w h i c h i s passed on, f r o m one s t a g e
t o t h e n e x t . The d i r e c t i o n o f t h e
information flow
is
i n d i c a t e d by
arrows.
However,
the
connecting
lines
are
only
schematic,
and
a d d i t i o n a l f e e d b a c k l o o p s may e x i s t .
The
other
stages,
such
as
c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n , a r e n o t
part of
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as
defined here.
I n f a c t , i t m u s t be

understood
clearly
that
the
operation
r u l e r e s u l t i n g from t h e
planning
process
is
a
first
approximation only: experience w i t h
t h e a c t u a l p r o j e c t w i l l have t o b e
incorporated
i n t o improved r u l e s .
The
planner
must
a l l o w enough
f l e x i b i l i t y for
later
adjustments,
b e c a u s e most o p e r a t i o n
rules are
d e v e l o p e d o n t h e b a s i s o f some k i n d
it is
very
o f a forecast,
and
unlikely
that
the r e a l world w i l l
b e h a v e as p r e d i c t e d
during
the
planning.

1.1
applies
to
all
Figure
l e v e l s of
planning,
perhaps w i t h
some
of
t h e stages
combined o r
omitted.
I t
does
not
give
i n f o r m a t i o n o n how t h e s t a g e s a r e t o
b e e x e c u t e d o r what methods a r e t o
be used.
I n most c o u n t r i e s
or
organizations,
the
p l ann i n g
r e g u l a t i o n s or r u l e s g i v e n t o water
resources
p anning
boards
are
s p e l l e d o u t i n more d e t a i l .
As a n
example,
in
he FRG t h e p l a n n i n g
process
is
described
for
the
national
and r e g i o n a l
levels
by
public
laws
which
mostly
are
intended t o s e t procedures f o r t h e
process o f approving p r o j e c t s , w h i l e
t h e stages o f p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g for
some t y p e s o f p r o j e c t s a r e o u t l i n e d
i n standards
(for
example,
the
reservoir
planning
process
is
s p e l l e d o u t i n s t a n d a r d Nos.
DIN
19700-10,
i n which a procedure i s
described which roughly corresponds
t o t h e stages o f our F i g u r e 1.1).
These laws and r e g u l a t i o n s a r e n o t
expressions o f national objectives,
but other
c o u n t r i e s have
included
such
national
objectives.
For
the
Principles
and
examp 1 e,
Standards o f
t h e Water
Resources
Council
of
t h e U.S.
are rather
explicit
i n the p r i o r i t i e s that are
t o be used i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s .
The
planner
must
realize
that
o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s may s h i f t due t o
the s h i f t s
i n v a l u e judgments o r
d e v e l o p m e n t o b j e c t i v e s , and t h i s i s
part of
the uncertainties
(called
the
"strategic
uncertainties"
by
K i s i e l and D u c k s t e i n
(1972)) w h i c h
he has t o a l l o w f o r .
the
I t w i l l be t h e p u r p o s e o f
f o l l o w i n g chapters
t o describe the

stages o f t h e p l a n n i n g process
in
more d e t a i l
and t o
interpret
the
boxes o f
Figure 1.1.
The g e n e r a l
procedure f o r
the planning o f
a
p r o j e c t u s u a l l y begins w i t h
the
designing
of
a diagram o f
the
physical
system,
consisting
of
geographical
maps
showing
the
l o c a t i o n s o f demand and s u p p l y as
typical
w e l l as t h e l o c a t i o n s of
structures
and t h e i r
connections.
Such a map (as i s appended i n more
o r l e s s s i m p l i f i e d f o r m t o each o f
t h e case studies)
forms t h e b a s i s
for
a system d i a g r a m - a b l o c k
d i a g r a m o f t h e system.
This block
d i a g r a m r e p r e s e n t s t h e system i n i t s
state of
operation.
The p r o c e s s
described
i n Figure 1.1 i s then t h e
p r o c e s s o f m o d i f y i n g and q u a n t i f y i n g
(of
t h e i n i t i a l l y c o n c e i v e d system
Stage
1)
t h r o u g h Stages 2 t o 5 t o
i t s f i n a l design.
I t i s useful t o consider Figure
1 . 1 as a g u i d e b y w h i c h t o a p p r o a c h
t h e p l a n n i n g process.
However, t h e
p r o c e d u r e does not g u a r a n t e e t h e
quality of
the r e s u l t s
of
the
p l a n n i ng;
t his
depends
on t h e
c o r r e c t n e s s o f t h e system e l e m e n t s
and
of
the data describing
the
system.
I t i s necessary t o o b t a i n
a l l . t h e needed i n f o r m a t i o n o n each
o f t h e s y s t e m e l e m e n t s b e f o r e any
system a n a l y s i s i s t o be performed.
F o r t h i s , c h e c k l i s t s a r e sometimes
used.
However,
even
the
best
c h e c k l i s t s and p l a n n i n g s c h e d u l e s
c a n o n l y b e a g u i d e , and t h e y m u s t
be
used
with
care
and
discrimination.
They
can
supplement,
but not replace,
the
ski 11
and
intuition
of
the
e x p e r i e n c e d and c r e a t i v e p l a n n e r .
He m u s t d e c i d e o n t h e v a r i a b l e s
and
the
values
of
constants
and
parameters,
he
identifies
and
decides
on
the
importance
of
constraints,
he d e t e r m i n e s t h e m o s t
appropriate
state
transition
function of
logical
or
structural
And,
f i n a l 1 y,
no
e 1 emen t s
hard-and-fast
r u l e s e x i s t o n what
p l a n n i n g p r o c e d u r e s a r e t o b e used:
t h e f i n d i n g o f t h e b e s t approach for
addressing t h e p l a n n i n g process i s a
d i f f i c u l t problem i n i t s e l f .

1.6

Advantages and (current)

disadvantages of the systems
approach to water resources

Analysis
of water
resources
systems and w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g
for
such a n a l y s i s a r e v e r y o l d
in fact,
the
vast
activities i r r i g a t i o n p r o j e c t s o f Mesopotamia
o r Egypt o r C h i n a , b u i l t w e l l b e f o r e
times,
were
t h e beginning o f our
certainly
done
with
careful
p l a n n i n g , b a s e d on l o n g o b s e r v a t i o n s
and e x p e r i e n c e .
Such systems were
subject
to
improvement
over
centuries by
trial
and
error,
l i n k i n g the society o f the country
and i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s
to
the
of
water
and
the
management
resources.
u t i l i z a t i o n o f the water
And t h u s
i t has b e e n t h r o u g h t h e
But,
in
spite
of
the
ages.
important r o l e which water resources
p 1 ayed
in
the
deve 1 opment
development o f
some c o u n t r i e s ,
it
has o n l y b e e n t h r o u g h t h e e f f o r t s i n
o t h e r areas o f p l a n n i n g t h a t t h e
analytical
background f o r
modern
systems a n a l y s i s has been c r e a t e d
(Rogers
1980).
Therefore,
modern
systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s
have
entered
the
planning
o f water
r e s o u r c e s systems d u r i n g t h e s i x t i e s
(Maass e t a l .
1962; H a l l and Dracup
1969; Buras 1972).
Systems
analysis
proponents
have e s t a b l i s h e d t h e s c i e n c e
of
water
r e s o u r c e s systems a n a l y s i s
with
an
enthusiasm
which
is
u n s u r p a s s e d b y any o t h e r a r e a s o f
w a t e r r e s e a r c h , so t h a t t o d a y a v a s t
expertise exists t o optimize real
(and
imagi ned)
water
resources
systems.
The
reason
for
this
understood,
enthusiasm i s e a s i l y
because s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s
opened u p t h e
murky
field
of
decision-making
i n water resources
eng i neer i ng, hand 1 ed u p t o t h e n o n 1 y
b y i n t u i t i o n and e x p e r i e n c e
(so i t
seemed),
to
the
clarity
that
mathematics
gives
to
analysis
so
to
the
processes,
and
introduction o f objectivity
into
what
seemed t o be s u b j e c t i v e and i n
some
cases
arbitrary
decision
A b r e a k t h r o u g h was made
processes.
p o s s i b l e b y t h e computer
and
its
to
work
with
large
capability

-15-

amounts o f d a t a and t o s o l v e c o m p l e x
mathematical problems.
With
this
c a p a b i l i t y , the systems f o r m u l a t i o n
was q u a n t i f i a b l e , and t h e a d v a n t a g e s
of
systems
analysis
could
be
As
r e a l i z e d t o the f u l l
extent.
t i m e passes,
t h e systems a p p r o a c h
w i l l assert i t s e l f .
New g e n e r a t i o n s
of
computers,
i nc 1 u d i ng
m i n i c o m p u t e r s , become a v a i l a b l e t o
the
engineer
to
increase
his
p l a n n i n g c a p a b i l i t y o n h i s desk, and
to
increase
the
efficiency of
o p e r a t i o n through a d a p t i v e c o n t r o l s ,
f o r e c a s t i n g t e c h n i q u e s , and a d a p t i v e
for
al1
factors
a c c o u n t i ng
i n f l u e n c i n g the system o p e r a t i o n .
The systems a p p r o a c h becomes a
necessary
p 1 ann i ng
i ns t rumen t
because i t seems t o be t h e o n l y way
to
i n t e g r a t e t h e many i s s u e s w h i c h
the water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r must
consider i n h i s p l a n .
Environmental
protection,
the
issues o f
water
quality
for
human
well-being,
requirements of
recreational
use,
t h e i s s u e s o f c o n f l i c t i n g demands o n
scarce water resources - f o r a l l
of
these problem areas, s o l u t i o n s have
t o be f o u n d w h i c h m u s t be a b l e t o
withstand
the
scrutiny
of
professional
e x p e r t s and
of
an
increasingly
well-informed
and
critical
public.
Many o f
these
p e o p l e h a v e seen t h e f a i l u r e s
of
c o n v e n t i o n a l l y planned p r o j e c t s i n
w h i c h a s i n g l e p u r p o s e was f o l l o w e d
without
r e g a r d t o impacts on o t h e r
areas,
Examples
of
detrimental
i m p a c t s a r e r e s e r v o i r and r i v e r - b e d
sedimentation,
abuse o f w a t e r
in
i r r i g a t e d areas generated by
the
a p p a r e n t l y abundant s u p p l y o f w a t e r
from
i r r i g a t i o n works,
and w a t e r
p o l l u t i o n by
i n d u s t r y and c i t i e s .
These a r e o n l y a f e w examples o f t h e
negative
consequences
of
a
sectorially
o r iented
and
noncomprehensive approach t o w a t e r
resources planning.
On t e c h n i c a l
grounds,
t h e main advantages o f t h e
systems a p p r o a c h i n w a t e r
resources
planning are:

1.
O b j e c t i v e s can b e s t a t e d
quantitatively,
often in analytical
t e r m s , and o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s and
constraints
can
be
formulated,
p e r m i t t i n g g e n e r a t i o n of a p l a n t h a t

accounts
for
a l l the sectors which
influence or
are
i n f l u e n c e d by a
water resources p r o j e c t .

2.
The l e v e l o f p e r f o r m a n c e o f
a system,
as
measured
against
c e r t a i n performance
standards, can
be
quantified,
a1 l o w i n g
the
incorporation
of
risk
and
uncer t a i n t y
in t o
the
dec i s i o n
process.

3. I t becomes f e a s i b l e t o make
complex m o d e l s o f
real-world
water
r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m s so t h a t a much
lower degree o f
abstraction
and
s i m p l i f i c a t i o n i s necessary than i n
c o n v e n t i o n a l approaches.
T h i s i s an
advantage which
is
a
necessary
prerequisite
f o r addressing issues,
in
particular
those
of
a
mu 1 t i o b j e c t i v e
and
mu 1 t i p u r p o s e
nature.
The v e r y a d v a n t a g e o f
being
a b l e t o h a n d l e l a r g e and c o m p l i c a t e d
p l a n n i n g p r o j e c t s i s a l s o t h e main
d isadvantage
of
the
systems
approach.
F i r s t of
a l l , there i s
t h e problem o f
the q u a l i t y
and
quantity
of
d a t a w h i c h may b e
required, w i t h a l l
the
limitations
s e t b y f u n d i n g and t i m e f o r d a t a
acqui s i t i o n .
This
problem
'is
Then t h e r e
discussed
i n C h a p t e r 3.
is
the
problem
that
the
decision-maker
may
f i n d himself
confronted w i t h a
selection
of
decisions
t h a t are n o t obvious t o
h i m and w h i c h have b e e n o b t a i n e d b y
a n a l y t i c a l p r o c e d u r e s t h a t he c a n n o t
understand
without
i n v e s t i ng
substantial
effort,
f o r w h i c h he
u s u a l l y has no t i m e .
And s y s t e m s
hem i n t o x i c a t e d
a n a l y s t s , many o f
by t h e i r c o m p u t e r s , a r e n o t h e l p f u l ;
communication
i n p a i n language, o r
t h e engineers,
i n t h e language o f
than
seems t o b e more d i f f i c u l t
mathematical
solving
comp 1 ex
problems.
T h e dec s i o n - m a k e r v i e w s
suspicion,
or
the r e s u l t s w i t h
worse,
w i t h a f a l s e confidence t h a t
may n o t b e j u s t i f i e d
because o f
p l a n n i n g e r r o r s (which happens!)
or
t h e use o f
models w h i c h have n o t
been d e v e l o p e d f a r enough t o p e r m i t
the conclusions f o r which they are
used.

A t
this
stage
it
seems
worthwhile
t o l i s t some o f t h e more
commonly p e r c e i v e d s h o r t c o m i n g s
of
s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s as a p p l i e d t o w a t e r
resources
planning;
we c a n t h e n
a n a l y z e t r e n d s i n t h e development o f
systems a n a l y s i s aimed a t o v e r c o m i n g
these d i f f i c u l t i e s .
Following are
t h e major sources o f t h e s k e p t i c i s m
t h a t many a g e n c i e s
have a b o u t
the
p o s s i b i l i t y o f a c t u a l l y implementing
systems
methodologies
in
water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management:
(i)

S i n g l e-vs.
mu 1 t i p l e - o b j e c t i v e
mode 1 s .
S i n g l e - o b j e c t i v e - f u n c t i o n modhave
dominated
most
e1s
in
water
past
s t u d i es
Yet the
resources planning.
many
competing
and
often
goa 1 s
and
conf 1 i c t i n g
objectives
of
almost
every
water
r e s o u r c e s s y s t e m make
such models i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h
r e a l it y
and
theref ore
A
water
unacceptable.
r e s o u r c e s agency may n o t f i n d
models w i t h a s i n g l e - o b j e c t i v e
f u n c t i o n t o b e a c c e p t a b l e as a
decision-making
tool
if, for
the
p r o b 1 em
it
examp 1 e,
a t tempts
to
model
is
characterized
by
multiple
noncommensurable
objectives
Fu tur e
water
and
goals.
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g models a r e
1 ik e l y
to
encompass
multiple-objective
functions
in
their
noncommensurable
units.

(ii )

" S o f t " vs.

"hard" elements i n
modeling.
There i s a growing
need
to
include
in
the
modeling
considerations
the
s o - c a 1 1 ed " s o f t "
e 1 ements
s u c h as s o c i e t y ,
politics,
legal
aspects,
and
the
the
environment - along w i t h
as
"hard"
elements
such
econom i cs
and
the
p h y s i c a l - t e c h n o l o g i c a l system.
Consequently,
new a p p r o a c h e s
and m e t h o d o l o g i e s c a p a b l e o f
coping w i t h
these
complex
" h a r d " and " s o f t " e l e m e n t s and
b r i d g i n g t h e gap b e t w e e n them
a r e b e i n g developed.
These
new a p p r o a c h e s a r e b a s e d o n

v a r i o u s t h e o r i e s and c o n c e p t s ,
such a s d e c i s i o n t h e o r y , game
theory, u t i l i t y theory,
fuzzy
set
theory,
vector
optimization,
and s i m u l a t i o n
w i t h i n t e r a c t i v e modes.

( i i i ) "Narrow" vs.
"total"
models.
A b a s i c concept b e i n g preached
s tudent s
of
systems
to
analysis i s that,
for
the
analysis of
a s y s t e m t o be
m e a n i n g f u l , t h e whole system
s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d .
Yet,
most
well-documented
simulation
and m a t h e m a t i c a l
models o f w a t e r
systems a r e
aimed a t i n v e s t i g a t i n g n a r r o w ,
s p e c i f i c , and s e l e c t e d a s p e c t s
o f a regional water resources
By v i r t u e o f t a c k l i n g
system.
one p a r t o f t h e p r o b l e m w h i l e
assuming knowledge o f o t h e r
parts,
these models a r e o f t e n
o n e - s i d e d and u s u a l l y do n o t
r e p r e s e n t t h e o v e r a l l system
behavior.
The r e a s o n t h e y a r e
oversimpl i f ied
can
be
e x p l a i n e d by t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f
solving
the problem o f u s i n g
c o n v e n t i o n a l systems a n a l y s i s
tools
t o model a l a r g e - s c a l e ,
complex system.
The f u t u r e
trend
is
toward
modi f y i ng
e x i s t i n g models t o i n c o r p o r a t e
them
i n t o the analysis o f the
total
system.
T h i s can b e
done
by
us i ng
hierarchical-multilevel
structures
that
r e l a t e and
the
v a r i ous
coord in a t e
submode 1 s and o b j e c t i v e s o f
t h e t o t a l system.
(iv)

Lack o f d a t a p l a n n i n g .
In
many c o u n t r i e s t h e r e has been
a l a c k o f i n t e r a c t i o n between
data-collection
a g e n c i e s and
those
in
charge o f water
resources
p l ann i ng
and
management. T h e r e i s an a c u t e
need f o r a n a l y t i c a l f r a m e w o r k s
capable o f
evaluating
the
w o r t h o f d a t a f o r an o p t i m a l
data-collection
system
(with
respect
to
collecting,
p r o c e s s i n g , d i s s e m i n a t i n g , and
projecting
future
data
In addition,
these
demands).
operational
frameworks ought

t o be r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e needs
o f p l a n n e r s f o r management of
water
and
related
land
systems.
(VI

(vi)

Lack o f i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h
the
decision-makers.
Water
r e s o u r c e s y s t e m s a n a l y s e s have
o f t e n been done i n i s o l a t i o n
from the decision-makers
and
commissioned
agencies
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r , and i n c h a r g e
of,
implementing t h e r e s u l t s
of
these analyses.
Trends
i n d i c a t e t h a t more emphasis i s
b e i n g placed on c o n s t r u c t i n g
m o r e - r e a l i s t i c models t h a t a r e
acceptable
to
these
decision-makers
and a g e n c i e s .
C 1o s e r
communication
and
cooperation
between
systems
analysts
and
national
and
local
agencies
should
be
established.
Lack
of
follow-up
in
implementation.
The m a j o r i t y
of
s t u d i e s o f water resources
systems a r e c o n d u c t e d b y one
group
or
agency
and
implemented,
if at all,
by
another.
This
1 ack
of
c o n t i n u i t y and f o l l o w - u p
of
t h e s t u d y b y t h e m o d e l e r s and
systems a n a l y s t s o f t e n r e s u l t s
i n misunderstandings o f
the
m o d e l s by t h e
implementing
agencies.
Most i m p o r t a n t l y ,
t h e e x p e r i e n c e and know-how
g a i n e d by m o d e l e r s and systems
analysts
are
not u t i l i z e d
w h e r e t h e y a r e b a d l y needed.
Again,
the trend i s
in the
d i r e c t i on
of
more
communication
between t h e two
g r o u p s so t h a t a c l o s e d - l o o p
operation replaces the present
open-loop one.

I n systems a n a l y s i s , i t i s n o t
t h e model i n i t s e l f t h a t c o u n t s , b u t
i t s performance.
As was p o i n t e d o u t
above,
t o cast a r e a l - w o r l d problem
i n t o t h e framework most s u i t e d f o r a
c e r t a i n type of analysis very o f t e n
involves the s i m p l i f i c a t i o n o f the
problem i n c e r t a i n areas.
Are t h e
s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s permissible?
This
i s an i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n , b u t n o t
n e a r l y as i m p o r t a n t as t h e q u e s t i o n

o f whether a l l s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s
a r e a c c o u n t e d f o r , and w h e t h e r t h e
numerical values of
t h e parameters
and c o e f f i c i e n t s w h i c h a r e used a r e
o f t h e r i g h t magnitude.
Since t h e
systems a n a l y s t u s u a l l y does
not
have t h e b r o a d e x p e r i e n c e r e q u i r e d
for
such
insights
and
the
e x p e r i enced eng i neer ( p l a n n e r ) d o e s
n o t know enough
about
planning
techniques, i t i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r
a successful planning e f f o r t t h a t
decision-makers,
systems a n a l y s t s ,
work
and
engineers
(planners)
together
i n an a t m o s p h e r e o f m u t u a l
t r u s t and w i l l i n g n e s s t o l e a r n .
I n s u c h an a t m o s p h e r e ,
the
advantages
of
systems
analysis
g r e a t l y outweigh i t s disadvantages,
and b y l e a v i n g t h e p r o b l e m s w h i c h
cannot
be r e s o l v e d b y p r e s e n t l y
a v a i l a b l e techniques outside o f
the
system
model and e v a l u a t i n g
its
aspects separately by conventional
methods,
t h e systems a n a l y s t c a n
substantially
improve t h e p l a n n i n g
process
w i thout
i n s p i r i ng
a
confidence t h a t i s not j u s t i f i e d .
I t is difficult
t o speculate
how
systems
analysis
i n water
resources w i l l
develop
in
the
future.
The systems a p p r o a c h
is
used t o s o l v e t h e o l d problems o f
water resources,
b u t on a h i g h e r
l e v e l than t h e "old" techniques.
We
m u s t assume t h a t t h e r e a r e h i g h e r
l e v e l s s t i l l t o be f o u n d - b u t we d o
n o t know o f
them,
j u s t as
the
p l a n n e r s o f y e s t e r d a y d i d n o t know:
B u t we v e n t u r e t o p r e d i c t t h a t t h e
f o r e s e e a b l e development w i l l be i n
the
direction
of
closing
the
c o m m u n i c a t i o n s gap and m a k i n g t h e
p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s more t r a n s p a r e n t .
will
Mathematical
system
models
evolve
i n t o a s u p p o r t framework f o r
decision-making
that
i nc 1 u d e s
numerous s m a l l e r m o d e l s t h a t a r e
self-contained
and d e s i g n e d t o b e
u s e d i n t e r a c t i v e l y by a n a l y s t s and
policy-makers
a t different levels.
Better
physical
models,
better
be developed.
economic m o d e l s w i l l
Minicomputers
and
interactive
be u s e d
to
make
software w i l l
d e c i s i o n s more t r a n s p a r e n t and h e l p
decisions
t o be a c c o m p l i s h e d
in
sess i o n s
of
experts
who
are

-18-

the
common l a n g u a g e
systems a n a l y s i s .

required

Water Resources, Jerusalem.

by

K i s i e l , C.,
T h e r e w i l l a l s o be d e v e l o p m e n t s
a t the higher
levels of
planning,
d i c t a t e d b y needs o f e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g
c o m p l e x i t i e s o f economic and s o c i a l
institutions
for
which
water
resources p r o j e c t s provide p a r t o f
the
infrastructure.
For example:
a t t h e r e g i o n a l l e v e l , a hydropower
project
i s a part of
the
local
e l e c t r i c power s u p p l y system: a t t h e
i t becomes p a r t o f
national
level,
a
t h e energy supply
system
of
country:
and a t
the international
level, i t i s part o f
international
compound e n e r g y g r i d s y s t e m s .
Such
large-scale
systems
may
require
large
efforts
i n c o l l e c t i n g and
s t o r i n g data, which w i l l lead t o t h e
e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f v a s t d a t a banks a t
a l l planning levels.
And a t a l l l e v e l s t h e r e w i l
a c o n t i n u i n g need t o r e v i e w
planning decisions of. yesterday
the
light
of
developments
evolutions
of
the
social
economic f a b r i c o f t h e c o u n t r y ,
of
t h e needs and demands w h i c h
placed on t h e water resources o f
region.

1.7

l be
the
in
and
and
and
are
the

References

Buras,
N.
1972.
The S c i e n t i f i c
A l l o c a t i o n o f Water
Resources.
E l s e v i e r , New York/Amsterdam.

L.
Duckstein,
and R .
David, L . ,
Krysztofowict.
1977 *
Multiobjective
planning
of
runoff
regulation
under
u n c e r t a i n water
demands.
In
o f t h e 1 s t I n ' l Conf.
on
Proc.
Applied
Numerical
Modelling,
Univ.
of
Southampton,
July
1977, PP* 13-22.

and L .

Duckstein,
eds.
Proceed i n g s ,
International
Symposium
on
Uncertainties
i n H y d r o l o g y and
W a t e r R e s o u r c e s , Tucson, A r i z .

1972.

Maass, A., e t a l .
1962. D e s i g n o f
Water
Resources
Systems.
Harvard
University
Press,
Cambridge, Mass.

I . B o g a r d i , and L.
N a c h t n e b e l , H.,
1982.
Duckstein.
Mu1 t i c r i t e r i o n
anal ys i s
for
regional
water
resources
development.
In
Proceedings,
I F l P WG 7.1 W o r k i n g C o n f e r e n c e ,
E n v i r o n m e n t a l Systems A n a l y s i s
and Management
(Rome,
Italy,
28-30
September,
1981).
N o r t h - H o l l a n d , New Y o r k .
R o g e r s , P.
1980.
Role o f
systems
a n a l y s i s as a t o o l
i n water
p o l i c y , p l a n n i n g a n d management.
I n U n i t e d N a t i o n s , R e p o r t o f UF;
Workshop,
Water
Resources
P 1 ann i ng:
Experiences
in a
N a t i o n a l and R e g i o n a l
Context.
Castelgandolfo
and
Stresa,
Italy.
S h a m i r , U.
1983.
Experiences
in
multiobjective
planning
and
management o f w a t e r
resources
systems.
Hydrological
Sciences
J o u r n a 1 , 28 :77-92.

U.S.

OTA-U.S.
Congress, O f f i c e o f
1982.
Technology
Assessment.
Use
of
Models
for
Water
Resources Management, P l a n n i n g ,
and P o l i c y .
U.S.
Government
Printing
Office,
Washington,
D.C.

U.S.

Resources
Counci 1 .
Water
and R e l a t e d Land
Resources,
Establishment
of
P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s
for
P l a n n i n g , Washington, D . C .
Water

1973.

H a l l , W.
A., and J .
Dracup.
1969.
Water
Resources
Systems
Engineering.
McGraw-Hill,
New
Y o r k , NY.
Jamieson, D .
G.
1979.
Planning,
d e s i g n and o p e r a t i o n o f w a t e r
resources
s y s terns.
Int.
Conference
on
Operations
Research
in
Agr i c u l t u r e
and

Williams,
C.
1984.
Hydrological
aspects
in
integrated
river
bas i n
development.
xvi i I
General Assembly
of
the
IUGG,
1 5 - 2 7 August 1983, Hamburg, F R G .

- 19S/o,qe I

Plan iniliation
arid preliniinary
planning
(Chapter 2)

Sto,qe 2

Data collection
and processing
(Chapter 3)

t
Slage 3

Generation
o f alternatives
I

Formulation
and screening
o f project
alternatives

...............................

?
I
I
I

I
I

I
I
I

Methods:

Oprirnizatior
Multiobjec/ive anulysis
Hierurchical unolysis
elc.

Interaction with:

gineers, hydrologists, elc.

Pirhlic
O / h e r unencies

Negotiations

I
I
I
I
0

I
I
I

resolution
I
I

-+
I

End o f
prcfeasibility
study

Selected project
alternatives

Political process

1 Abort

Detailed formulation
o f projects
Slage 4

Development o f
linal study
results

1
Model building
and model analysis

Design parameters
for structures

End of
feasibility
study

Stage 5

Design
Construction
Operation

Fig. 1.1 Stages in the water resources planning process

Operation rules,
operation niodels

Table 1.1 Surface water flow and supply model evaluation

..

Issue .~
~

~. . . ...

-~

.~

required for applications

_ ~ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ Information
-~

Water avallsbillty:
1. Flood forecasting and control

2. Drolight and low.flGw river

forecasting

3. Streamf!ow regula!ion
(incl cdi n g r e s e r a rs)

Overall
rating

a. Flood peaks for channel and bridge ,jesign

b. Flood hydrographs for reserdoir design and operation
c. Simultaneous flood hydrograchs for floor: contrcl system 'jesi;n

C
C

and 3peratiin
d. Flood depth mapping for flood plain land-use planr.ing
e. Effects of land use on dowqstream flcws for ups:ream land-(;se pianning
1. Flood peaks after dam failures for emergency preparedness planning
0. Soil moisture conditions for land drainage design

D
C

a. Low river flows for offstream uses

b. Timing of drought sequences for estimating cumulative x o f i o m i c irrpact
c. Soil moisture conditions for precipitation-supplied uses

C
B
C

a. Runoff #olurne for maximum obtainable yield

b. Rurlcff time patterns (within ane a r s n p years) :or reserfoir siz!ng

c. Simultaneous runoff volumes in regional streams !or regional

water supply planning

C
C

4. lnstream flow needs

a. Low river flows for estimating fish supprrrl potential

b. W;thin.yea: timing of low flows for fish iifecycle ma!chinp
c . Timing of drought sequences for es:imating minimum reservoir or lake ievels
d. Flow .velocities within streams !or estimating ef:ects on fish specres
a. LDW river flcws for sus!a!cing rec:ea!icn capacily and es:he!ic appeal
b. Timing of flow sequences 'or matching with recrea!icn periods
c. Runoff time patterns (w!thm and among years) for es!irr,ar:ng the impact of
fluclua!icns in lake !evels
a. Low river flows for determining wa!e?kay capacity
b. High river flows for deter-icing navigalion ;nterfe:ence
c. Formatior, of sueace ice for determining navigation inter'erexe
a. Timing of flow sequences for es?ima!ing run.of-the-rive:
generating capacity
b. Runoff time patterns (within and among years) for des,gnii:g
streamf!ow regu!a!cons
c. Simultanecus rlrnoff volumes i n rei;ional streams for CeGional Seie'ating
sys:en planning

Fish and Wiid!ife

Rec:ea:ion

Nav!pation

Hydrodlectricity

Water use:
5 . 0 o n e i : i c watEr supply

8
B
C
C
0

B
C
C
0
B

B
C

a. Timing of .#ater use for deiivery sys!en design

b. Wa!er presEues thioughout delivery system for deiiverf sys!em design
c . Volune o f use for sizing supply 'aciiities
d. Re!url flow ,vo:umes fcr .?esign:ng ,waste'&a!er zoiier!;6n 5ysre.r.s

6 Irrigated asricuiture

7. Orher offs!ream uses

C
B

a. TirC.ins cf ,va!er use ' o r de!iverf sys:en design

b. Voiume of use for sizing suppiy facilities
c. Re:urn flow tolirmes ' o r drainage i y s : e T 6esign

a. Volume of 1ndus:r:aI use for s u i n g supply facilities

B
B

.-

Source:

U.S.

O f f i c e o f Technology Assessment,

1982

-.

-21-

Table 1.2

Surface water quality model evaluation

_Generic
type
.. -_-___

Issue
__ ____~ _ _ _ ~ _ _ - Nonpoint source pollullon and land use
Urban %Ooff:
Source~'~e.?e:s:ion.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport to receiving water.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impacts on beneficial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Control optionsicosts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Erosion and sedirneatation:
Source:geieration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transpor; to receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impacts on beneficial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Control options'costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sal in i:y :
Source:genera!ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport t o receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport in receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impacts o n k n e f i c i a i u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Control optionsicosts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other agricultural runoff:
Sourceige2eration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport to receiving ,water.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport in receiving w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impacts on bene!icial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Control options,costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Airborne pcllutants:
Sourceigeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport !o receiving ,water.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impacts on beneficial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Control optionsicosts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Water quallly (other than nonpoint sources and land u s r j
Was:e!cad allocation:
Sou:ceiEenera:ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport !o recewing w a t e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impac!s an bene!i;ial u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Controi optionsicos!s, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thermai pollution.
Source!genera:icn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport to receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transpofl in receiving water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
lrnpacls on beneficla! u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Controi opticn3:ccsts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Toxic materialsS0urce'geie;a:ion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport ! o recexing w a ! e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transport ~n :ece:vir; wa:er . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
lrnfiacts on berie!:ctal use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contrci op!ions,cos:s
.......................
Drlnkirg
IkaiitySource . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Trea:menr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impac!s on bene!iciai u s e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Water quaiity impac!s on aqlJa!ic iife . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
~

..

~.~

I
No computer,
not cornzdex

II
Com puler,
not complex
~

111
Computer,
complex

-..__-___

IV
Computer,
complex,
operational

Overall level
of modeling
sophistication
4

C
C

C
A
C
C

A
C

B
A

9
A
A
A

A
A
A
C

A
A
A
C

C
0

A
A
C
C
A

A
A
C
C
A

C
A

A
A
A
C

A
A
A
C
E

A
A
A
C
E

A
A
A
C

A
A
A
C
A

A
A

A
?

A
A

E
C
A

C
A

A
A
A
C
A
1

C
C
C
C
C

C
C

C
C
C

A
A
C

Source:

U . S . O f f i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y Assessment,

3
~

Reliabie, credit'e .Tods!ing may ?a 'cadily G;leC for most problems 0 1 : h ~ r3 ~ b t a s t ; e Sorrz modeis ma, Se sdl!ab;e !or :eGula!ioo an.? d e i i ~ n .
0 S a m 8s C, bu! sorne models may be ~ s s ' i r lfor o l a n i i i g am5 ,eia!ed 3 ? - r , x 3 + 3 and suitabis 'or j e : e ' m l r l n g .e!a:;ve e f l s c f r .
c Modeling is w%ble Credibility ard 'eliab!lily of W ~ ~ I ! :IS i o w due I s weak:es3~3 .n !h4 ja!a : d ~ e
- Mcdeiing 0 1 !*lis :ype . s no! usdally pe+rmeC.
O W r a I ! : m 9 ! sf mo.jeii?s mphi)!iia:!on.
0 No modei3 wal'anie
10 Rou!ins >se ~f models 31 ai! !,wd

Key' A

1982

-22-

Table 1.3

Ground-water model evaluation

Mode' !ypes

Sja!ia! cxsldera!ions

Pollti:ai; m o v e m e n t .

I!

any

~~~~

F:o* c o n d i t i o n s
Issues
su2plies.

Ouanti!y--ava!:ablr
OLanti!y-cmju7c:ive
C)uali!y--scccen!a'
prGduC!s
,
__

use

.,.

....

se!'oieurrs

. ...

. . .~.., .

road salt . .
- - _ _ ~ _ _ _ ~ .

Ouali!y-accden!a;

Oualify - a c c i d e n t a l i n d u s t r u a l

Ouality--&gricu!tti:e
Oualiry-waste

sal! 5

d:sDgsal land!ill

- -_

OLiali!y - seawa
Key
e 5 !ne s:x:* :slum' apII!eS t c a s ' ! e - ~ r a l tPELIET ir, u r m L Doliu:a?! movernerl
s a ' - . a : e z '#:A ~ 2 7 3 1 z*
: I - ''a::--e'
np4.a

ji.

AppI8ca:ior scale

S l l e - - m M ~ i s 6Plalng wilh areas less Ihar. a f e u square miles

Locat-mod4s dealxnc wltb areas greater than a few square miles bu: less ihar. a few thousanc
Repionat-modeis deallnp w i t h areas prearer than a !ew th3usand sgbare miles

S ~ U W Em1ies

Abb-eviations.

W-wiln
wlt-without
~a!-sa!u~al(td prouid *aterflow Londlllons
unsal-ursaturalea flow conditions.
P-Pomur media
F-fractured 0 1 solution cavity media
Entries:
a usabie p:edtcl're :mi :avinC a h ~ .Jep:ee
~ h of rellabilily and credlbsliij Gwen sulficle?l dala
E a reliable rs?~:eytual 1001 capabis d 5horl.Ierm ( a l e * )'Ears! pwdlc!lon with a moderale level of c-edibiii:j Giver. su!!vcen! dats
a s e t u : CC.' .eDlr;al ImI for hslplnp the hydrolop~slsynthesize compiicalad hydrologic and gunlily dala
U a :wdeI !ha? i s still on Ihe researCV slape
- nc rrmdei ex,s1s.
Blank-model type not applicable IO i s u e area.

Source:

U.S.

O f f i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y Assessment,

1982

is

des;rltrec b*

:-a'sporl

2. Plan initiation and preliminary planning

T h i s c h a p t e r i s concerned w i t h
plan
initiation
and p r e l i m i n a r y
planning.
These
constitute
the
f i r s t s t a g e o f t h e water r e s o u r c e s
p l a n n i n g process.
During t h i s stage
the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f project
needs
i s f o l l o w e d by p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n ,
which should t a k e i n t o account t h e
dependency o f
t h e p r o j e c t on t h e
"non-water"
s e c t o r s o f t h e economy.
I n the course o f the chapter,
some
problems r e l a t e d t o t h e s t a t e m e n t of
project objectives
and c o n s t r a i n t s
w i l l be reviewed,
along w i t h t h e
challenges
associated w i t h choosing
a p p r o p r i a t e personnel
that
will
include
representatives
of
the
v a r i o u s agencies p l u s a v a r i e t y o f
e x p e r t s from many d i s c i p l i n e s .
The
importance
of
i nc 1 ud i ng
some
mechanisms f o r p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n
w i l l be discussed, a f t e r which t h e
conclude w i t h
some
chapter w i l l
comments
concerning
preliminary
s e l e c t i o n of system a n a l y s i s t o o l s
t o be u s e d i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s .

2.1 Problem formulation

P l a n n i n g f o r water
resources
p r o j e c t s i s i n i t i a t e d i n response t o
needs t h a t a l r e a d y e x i s t or a r e
anticipated
i n t h e more o r
less
distant future.
The n a t u r e o f t h e s e
needs
may
be
very
different.
Sometimes one can i d e n t i f y t h e k e y
needs,
for
example,
protection
against
floods
or
supplying
irrigation
water
to
sustain
a g r i c u l t u r a l development.
However,
i n most c a s e s t h e r e
i s a set of
mutual l y
depend en t
and
interconnected
needs;
and t h e i r
u n d e r s t a n d i n g and c l e a r a r t i c u l a t i o n
No e f f o r t s h o u l d b e
are d i f f i c u l t .
spared t o a n a l y z e
i n the broadest
p o s s i b l e terms what
i s their
real
nature.
Hence,
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of
needs i s a v e r y d i f f i c u l t b u t a t t h e
same t i m e v e r y
i m p o r t a n t phase o f
the p l a n n i n g process discussed
in

t h i s book.
T h e r e a r e no g o l d e n
rules
leading t o the successful
identification
of
needs.
The
p l a n n i n g team s h o u l d t h i n k h a r d , u s e
a1 1
information
and
evidence
a v a i l a b l e , and remember
above a l l
t h a t g e t t i n g deeper i n t o t h e i s s u e s
u n d e r d e b a t e and u n d e r s t a n d i n g them
better
is
likely
to
lead to
r e d e f i n i t i o n of
t h e needs a t t h e
l a t e r stages o f p r o j e c t planning.
One
of
the
greatest
difficulties
in
water
resources
planning
is
that
often
it is
initiated
i n response
to
poorly
or
i 1 I-def ined
needs.
d e f i ned
Utmost e f f o r t s h o u l d b e made t o
i d e n t i f y t h e needs c a r e f u l l y ,
but
sometimes
one must p r o c e e d e v e n
t h o u g h t h e needs have n o t b e e n a s
w e l l d e f i n e d as t h e y s h o u l d be.
But
let's
assume
that
we
have
s u c c e s s f u l l y i d e n t i f i e d t h e needs.
Subsequently, t h e v e r b a l l y d e s c r i b e d
needs m u s t b e t r a n s l a t e d
into a
formulation
of
the
problem.
I d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f needs and p r o b l e m
f o r m u l a t i o n a r e n o t t h e same t h i n g .
As p u t b y Quade (1980) :
Problem f o r m u l a t i o n i s concerned
w i t h s u c h t h i n g s as d e t e r m i n i n g
the goals or o b j e c t i v e s t o be
achieved by a s o l u t i o n ,
setting
b o u n d a r i e s on w h a t
i s t o be
i n v e s t i g a t e d , making assumptions
about
the context, i d e n t i f y i n g
t h e t a r g e t g r o u p s , and s e l e c t i n g
the
initial
approach
the
analysis i s t o take.
Translation of
needs
into a
problem
formulation
is
itself
a
process.
I t u n d e r g o e s changes
in
time w i t h
r e s p e c t t o language and
precision.
Initially,
problem
f o r m u l a t i o n must
be
above
all
compatible w i t h the
language and
p r e c i s i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h o s e who
a r e charged w i t h p l a n
initiation

-24-

responsibilities.
But
we
ma Y
encounter
a v e r y wide spectrum o f
different
situations.
P r o b 1 em
a
formulation for the i n i t i a t i o n o f
n a t i o n w i d e water resources p l a n w i l l
be l e s s s p e c i f i c t h a n , f o r example,
problem f o r m u l a t i o n f o r a r e l a t i v e l y
w e l l - d e f i n e d r e g i o n a l water
supply
project.
Hence, p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n
depends
o n t h e n a t u r e and s c o p e o f
t h e problem, on t h e p l a n n i n g
level,
on v a r i o u s c o n s t r a i n t s ( t e c h n i c a l ,
e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l , e t c . ) t h a t must
b e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t , and above a l l
o n p r o j ec t o b j e c t iv e s

most cases,
national
averages a r e
i n s u f f i c i e n t f o r p l a n n i n g purposes,
and t h i s c o n c e r n s b o t h t h e s u p p l y
and
demand
s ides
of
water
At
no p l a n n i n g l e v e l
management.
s h o u l d one
look a t
t h e problems
e x c l u s i v e l y from the perspective o f
water.
For
example, t h e a s s e r t i o n
"We have t o
increase a g r i c u l t u r a l
should
not
1 ead
p r o d u c t i on"
immediately
to
"We
need
more
irrigated
agriculture."
The r e a l
p r o b l e m may b e a b e t t e r d i s t r i b u t i o n
system f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t s o r
prevention o f t h e i r spoilage.

The
case
of
the
flood
protection
project
i n the S u l m
catchment i n t h e Federal Republic o f
Germany (see Case S t u d y 1)
provides
a good example o f how needs may be
translated
into
a
p r o b 1 em
formulation.
The needs o f
flood
protection
i n t h i s catchment were
known f o r
a long time,
but
they
r e a l l y surfaced a f t e r the disastrous
Most i m p o r t a n t , t h e
f l o o d o f 1970.
Audi-NSU w o r k s , w h i c h s u f f e r e d f l o o d
damage i n 1970 o f a b o u t
10 m i l l i o n
DM,
t h r e a t e n e d t o move t o a n o t h e r
l o c a t i o n unless
its
sites
were
protected against floods s i m i l a r t o
t h e one w h i c h o c c u r r e d
i n 1970.
Consequently,
a
flood-protection
d i s t r i c t was e s t a b l i s h e d w h i c h ,
in
cooperation w i t h the s t a t e water
administration,
f ormu 1 a t e d
the
problem,
worked o u t a p r e l i m i n a r y
p l a n , and s u b m i t t e d t h e p l a n f o r
approval
t o the s t a t e legislature,
which a l l o c a t e d necessary funds
and
authorized
initiation
of
the
p l a n n i n g work.

The p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t i o n depends
t o a l a r g e extent on
what
is
a c c e p t e d as t h e r e a l p r o b l e m i n t h e
region or
subregion
i n question.
For
example,
whether
sporting
fishery
i s a p r o b l e m o r n o t depends
v e r y much o n t h e g e n e r a l d e v e l o p m e n t
o f t h e r e g i o n and t h e a t t i t u d e s o f
the local
p o p u l a t i o n toward t h i s
type
of
recreational
activity.
B u i l d i n g a dam may b e c o n s i d e r e d an
environmental
problem
in a
more
naturea f f 1 uent
and-conservation-oriented
society,
w h i l e such c o n c e r n s w i l l
be l e s s
c r i t i c a l i n another s i t u a t i o n ,
such
as when a dam c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e
p r o d u c t i o n o f b a d l y n'eeded f o o d and
fibre.

The p l a n n i n g l e v e l s t h a t w e r e
1
(see s e c .
described
i n Chapter
1.3) d i f f e r i n c h a r a c t e r
and scope
f r o m one c o u n t r y t o a n o t h e r , b u t a l l
of
them r e q u i r e t h a t w a t e r p r o b l e m s
be formulated i n t h e c o n t e x t o f
the
and
social
overall
econom i c
aspirations o f a given region or
nation.
Some r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f
the
regional
and s u b r e g i o n a l l e v e l s o f
concern i s always necessary,
with
on
the
its
extent
depend i ng
d i s a g g r e g a t i o n o f t h e problems.
In

Problem f o r m u l a t i o n
i s always
subject t o
several
constraints.
P o l i t i ca 1
(adm i n i s t r a t i ve)
and
h y d r o l o g i c b o u n d a r i e s u s u a l l y do n o t
intersect,
time
andbudget
a l l o c a t i o n for problem s o l u t i o n a r e
often limited,
various regulations
s i g n i f i c a n t l y narrow t h e range o f
p l a n n i n g o p t i o n s , w a t e r demands a r e
o f t e n exogenous
t o the
planning
process,
s k i l l e d and p r o f e s s i o n a l
personnel
a r e u n a v a i l a b l e - these
a r e j u s t a few o f
the constraints
that
always
impact
problem
formulation.
The
appropriate
consideration of
each o f any such
p r o b 1 em
constraints
b r i ngs
formulation
closer
to
becoming
v i a b l e and i m p l e m e n t a b l e .
Several

issues

related

to

-25-

problem f o r m u l a t i o n are discussed i n

subsequent s e c t i o n s .

2.2

Dependency
of plan formulation on "non-water" sectors

After
t h e needs
have
been
identified
and
the
problem
formulated,
one
can
start
the
preliminary formulation of the plan.
Because a p l a n
i s concerned w i t h
water, i t should n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be
c o n s i d e r e d a ' ' w a t e r " p r o j e c t p e r se.
The s o l u t i o n may
i n f a c t be o n l y
tangentially
related
to
water
control
and management.
I t i s thus
very
important t h a t a l l
possible
c o m p e t i n g o r complementary a s p e c t s
of
the
of
"non-water"
sectors
economy b e c o n s i d e r e d b e f o r e t h e
p r e l i m i n a r y f o r m u l a t i o n o f a water
plan.
This
pertains
to
such
q u e s t i o n s as hydropower v s .
thermal
power
developments,
navigation vs.
r a i 1road
transportation,
and
structural
flood control
measures
f 1 oodp 1 a i n
vs.
nonstructural
management.
In
general
this
addresses t h e i s s u e o f s u b s t i t u t i o n
and t r a d e - o f f s .
The i n t e r f a c e and
i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f w a t e r and r e l a t e d
land resources w i t h other sectors of
t h e economy s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d
in
preliminary project formulation.

To what e x t e n t w a t e r
resources
management
i t s e l f c a n b e t r e a t e d as
an i n d i v i d u a l s e c t o r o f t h e n a t i o n a l
economy i s a n o t h e r q u e s t i o n w h i c h
has
no
clear
answer.
Even i n
c e n t r a l l y p l a n n e d economies,
water
management sometimes does n o t have a
sector
s t a t u s - w a t e r management
responsibi 1 i t i e s
are
d,istributed
among s e v e r a l m i n i s t r i e s ,
such as
those f o r a g r i c u l t u r e ,
energy,
and
pub1 i c w o r k s .
Water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r s must
o f t e n base t h e i r p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n on
imperfect
information
concerning
other
s e c t o r s o f t h e economy.
For
example, w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r s i n
I s r a e l f o r m u l a t i n g t h e E a s t e r n Negev
P r o j e c t (see Case Study 2)
stress
that
the
development
p l a n and
schedule f o r
industrial activities
were u n c e r t a i n , t h e f u t u r e c r o p p i n g
p a t t e r n s were d u b i o u s ,
and
the
o v e r a l l pace o f p h y s i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t

of the region
enough.
Such
explicitly
p r e l im i nary
phase.

2.3

was n o t s t a t e d c l e a r l y
d i f f i c u l t i e s should be
recognized
in
the
project
f o r m u l a t io n

Statement of
objectives

project

One o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t p a r t s
of preliminary plan formulation i s a
clear
statement
of
project
o b j e c t iv e s
I t
should
be
remembered, however,
that
i n most
practical
situations,
objectives
cannot
be
t a k e n as g i v e n .
As
p o i n t e d o u t b y H i t c h (1961),
it is
impossible
to
define
usua 1 1 y
appropriate
objectives
without
knowing a g r e a t d e a l
about
the
f e a s i b i 1 i t y and c o s t o f a c h i e v i n g
them.
And t h i s k n o w l e d g e m u s t b e
derived
from t h e a n a l y s i s .
The
greatest d i f f i c u l t y i n s t a r t i n g w i t h
given objectives i s the f a c t
that
most o f t e n t h e y a r e m u l t i p l e and
conflicting,
and t h a t a l t e r n a t i v e
means
of
satisfying
any
one
objective
a r e l i k e l y t o produce
substantial
adverse
effects
on
another.
N o t h i ng
but
r igorous
quantitative
analysis
can
tell
w h e t h e r a p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e makes
sense o r
n o t - whether
it
is
feasible,
how much
i t w i l l cost.
Such a n a l y s i s and u l t i m a t e c h o i c e o f
socially relevant project objectives
r e q u i r e s judgment b o t h on t h e p a r t
of
t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r , and
on t h e p a r t o f o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s i n
the p l a n n i n g process,
e.g.,
the
politicians.
This
i s s t r e s s e d by
M a j o r (1977),
who u n d e r 1 i n e s
that
"much o f
t h e c o n f u s i o n and d e b a t e
about water resources p r o j e c t s t h a t
have b e e n p r o p o s e d
i n the recent
years
has
arisen
because
the
p l a n n e r s were n o t d e v e l o p i n g d e s i g n
options responsive t o the o b j e c t i v e s
of
the
political
process.''
The
p e r c e p t i o n o f p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s by
the
public
at
l a r g e and o t h e r
constituencies i s equally important.

The g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s
are
stated d i f f e r e n t l y
a t the various
planning levels.
The ones a t
the
- f o r many good
national
level
reasons t h a t a r e n o t about t o change
- t e n d t o b e g l o b a l (e.g.,
to

-26-

enhance
n a t i ona 1
econom i c
development,
to
enhance
social
w e l l - b e i n g , t o enhance q u a l i t y ,
and
to
enhance
regional
economic
development).
Moreover, t h e y do n o t
d e t a i l the c o n f l i c t i n g issues.
They
are
i n t e n t i o n a l l y as encompassing
and as c o m p r e h e n s i v e as p o s s i b l e t o
e n s u r e b r o a d s u p p o r t by t h e v a r i o u s
c o n s t i t u e n c i e s and s t a k e h o l d e r s .
In
t h i s respect,
one s h o u l d k e e p
in
mind
the "horse-trading"
process
t h a t i s so d o m i n a n t when i t comes t o
the
water
resources
planning
process.
The a r t o f n e g o t i a t i o n and
compromise i s an
integral part of
t h a t p r o c e s s , and f o r
negotiations
t o succeed,
t h e p a r t i e s must s t a r t
w i t h a n a c c e p t a b l e agenda o f p r o j e c t
objectives
t h a t can be
modified
during
the negotiations.
Having
r e a c h e d agreement a b o u t t h e g e n e r a l
project objectives,
more f o c u s c a n
b e c e n t e r e d on s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s
and t h e i r
translation
i n t o design
criteria.
These c r i t e r i a r e q u i r e
d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e measures t h a t w i l l
b e used t o assess
t o what d e g r e e
i n d i v i d u a l o b j e c t i v e s have been m e t .
The s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s
u s u a l l y c o i n c i d e w i t h one
water
management p u r p o s e o r s e v e r a l , s u c h
as w a t e r s u p p l y , p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t
floods,
development o f n a v i g a t i o n ,
hydro-power
production.
The c a s e
s t u d i e s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e Appendix o f
t h i s book p r o v i d e a n i l l u s t r a t i o n o f
how d i f f e r e n t l y s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s
may b e s t a t e d .
The o n l y e x p l i c i t
objective of
the
Eastern
Negev
P r o j e c t i n I s r a e l ( s e e Case S t u d y 2 )
was
s a t i s f a c t i o n of the i n c r e a s i n g
w a t e r demands a t t h e
least overall
cost.
The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e Maumee
(see
R i v e r Basin Study i n t h e U . S .
Case S t u d y 4) were t o p r o t e c t l a n d
resources,
t o r e d u c e e r o s i o n and
sedimentation,
to
improve
water
quality,
to
protect
fish
and
w i Id1i f e
habitats,
to
enhance
outdoor r e c r e a t i o n opportunities, t o
r e d u c e f l o o d damages,
and t o meet
water
s u p p l y needs.
The o b j e c t i v e s
of
the Vistula River Project
in
P o l a n d (see Case S t u d y 6)
were t o
a
water
resources
formulate
development
(investment)
program
c a p a b l e o f m e e t i n g w a t e r management
tasks ( p r i m a r i l y water supply, f l o o d
c o n t r o l , and w a t e r q u a l i t y c o n t r o l )

that

were p r o j e c t e d t o t h e y e a r s
and 2000 (15 and 30 y e a r s t i m e
respectively).
The
h o r i zon,
objective
of
t h e A d e l a i d e Water
Resources S t u d y
i n Australia
(see
5)
was
to
make
Case
Study
recommendations f o r
a program o f
and
for
works
c o n s t r u c t i on
particular operating
policies,
in
order
t o p r o v i d e a water supply for
m e t r o p o l i t a n Adelaide over the n e x t
30 y e a r s .

1985

of
Even t h e s e few examples
project
o b j ec t i ves
show
that,
d e p e n d i n g o n t h e c h a r a c t e r and t h e
scope o f t h e p r o j e c t , o b j e c t i v e s c a n
be s t a t e d i n v e r y d i f f e r e n t ways.

2.4

Project constraints

The
evaluation
of
project
objectives
leads t o a l t e r n a t i v e s ,
whi l e
constraints
restrict
alternatives
and
reduce
their
number.
However, from an e v a l u a t i o n
p o i n t o f view,
constraints often
have
a
function
similar
to
objectives.
As p o i n t e d o u t by Simon
( 1 964) :

'

I t i s d o u b t f u l whether d e c i s i o n s
a r e g e n e r a l l y d i r e c t e d towards a
goal.
I t i s e a s i e r and c l e a r e r
to
view
d e c i s i o n s as b e i n g
concerned
with
discovering
courses o f a c t i o n t h a t s a t i s f y a
whole s e t of c o n s t r a i n t s .
I t is
t h i s s e t , and n o t any one o f i t s
members, t h a t i s m o s t a c c u r a t e l y
v i e w e d as t h e g o a l
of
the
action...
Whether we t r e a t a l l
t h e c o n s t r a i n t s s y m m e t r i c a l l y or
r e f e r t o some a s y m m e t r i c a l l y as
goals, i s l a r g e l y a matter o f
linguistic
or
analytic
convenience.

When a
distinction
between
objectives
(goals)
and c o n s t r a i n t s
i s made, i t i s u s u a l l y based o n t h e
misconception
of
accepting
the
constraint
as
an
absol U t e
restriction.
C o n s t r a i n t s must n o t
b e t r e a t e d as s a c r e d l y i n v i o l a b l e .
They must be s c r u t i n i z e d
f r o m many
points
o f v i e w as
the analysis
p r o c e e d s and t e c h n i c a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s
emerge, and t h e i r
r o l e s should be
s u b j e c t t o change.

-27-

Constraints
genera 1 1 y
considered
in
water
resources
planning vary widely.
They may b e
of technical
and economic n a t u r e ,
but
also
important
and
often
overlooked
or
underestimated are
i n s t i t u t i onal
and
cultural
c o n s t r a i n t s which r u l e o u t c e r t a i n
project alternatives.
I n general,
a l l c o n s t r a i n t s s h o u l d be e x p l i c i t l y
s p e c i f i e d and open t o d e b a t e i n t h e
plan
initiation
phase t o a v o i d
c o n t r o v e r s i e s t h a t may s u r f a c e a t
later
stages o f p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g o r
implementation.
The c a s e s t u d i e s i n t h i s book
s p e c i f y a wide spectrum o f d i f f e r e n t
constraints.
Time,
f u n d i ng,
technical ,
and
technological
c o n s t r a i n t s a r e most common, b u t
l e g a l c o n s t r a i n t s a r e a l s o mentioned
quite
often.
F o r example,
the
n a t i o n a l laws i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
a t the time o f
t h e Maumee S t u d y
placed
important
water
qual i t y
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n t h e hands o f t h e
As a
consequence,
the
states.
s t a t e s were n o t p r e p a r e d t o d r a f t a
w a t e r q u a l i t y management p l a n f o r an
e n t i r e basin.
Quite
often
the
planners are also constrained by the
requirement of
using only existing
d a t a , i r r e s p e c t i v e o f how a d e q u a t e
t h e d a t a base i s f o r t h e p r e p a r a t i o n
o f a p l a n (see Case Study 3 ) .
Lack
of
adequate
data,
existing
structures,
and
plans o f
other
agencies a r e a l s o
quite
common
constraints.
Some
constraints
are
permanent and c a n n e v e r be v i o l a t e d ,
while others are binding
i n the
s h o r t r u n and may b e changed by t h e
passage
of
t i m e o r removed by
invent ion
or
technological
i m p r o v e m e n t . Thus, some c o n s t r a i n t s
others
l e s s so.
But
are f i r m ,
irrespective of
the nature o f
a
particular
constraint,
i t i s the
professional
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the
systems a n a l y s t
t o point out
the
influence of
i t s marginal c o s t on
the p r o j e c t
outcomes.
If
the
systems
analyst
is
told
that
s o m e t h i n g he b e l i e v e s t o be r e l e v a n t
s h o u l d n o t o r c a n n o t be c o n s i d e r e d ,
he
must
clarify
to
the
decision-makers
what
the
consequences m i g h t b e .

2.5

Agencies
involved

and

personnel

The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
structure
t h e p l a n n e r s a r e f a c e d w i t h when
initiating
a
water
resources
planning e f f o r t
i s more o f t e n t h a n
not a "geological"
accumulation o f
past
organizational
compromises
W
( i ener
1972)
Somet i mes
the
existing
structure
fits
the
o b j e c t i v e s of t h e p r o j e c t ; sometimes
it
must be b y p a s s e d and a new
p l a n n i n g e n t i t y be c r e a t e d .
No h a r d
and f a s t
r u l e determines what
is
b e s t f o r e a c h s p e c i f i c case.

I f a national
agency
charged
w i t h water
planning
i s already i n
e x i s t e n c e and t h e p r o j e c t i s n o t o f
a very
l o c a l s c a l e , t h i s agency i s
t h e one w h i c h u s u a l l y t a k e s t h e l e a d
and p r e p a r e s t h e p l a n .
T h i s was t h e
case o f
the V i s t u l a Project
in
P o l a n d ( s e e Case S t u d y 6 ) . w h e r e t h e
consulting f i r m operating w i t h i n the
framework
of
t h e N a t i o n a l Water
was
charged
with
Author i t y
p r e p a r a t i o n of a p l a n i n c o o p e r a t i o n
w i t h a b o u t 40 r e s e a r c h i n s t i t u t i o n s
representing
a1 1
ministries
of
concerned.
The
d e v e 1 opmen t
p l a n n i n g m e t h o d o l o g y was a s s i g n e d t o
a s p e c i a l l y f o r m e d r e s e a r c h team o f
a b o u t 20 s p e c i a l i s t s who c o o p e r a t e d
c l o s e l y w i t h an i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a n e l
of
United
Nations
Development
Programme
(UNDP) e x p e r t s t h r o u g h o u t
the e n t i r e duration of the p r o j e c t .
UNDP e x p e r t s a s s i s t e d a l s o i n t h e
preparation of
the
Upper
Mures
Project
i n Romania (see Case S t u d y
91, w h i c h was a s s i g n e d t o a n a t i o n a l
w a t e r r e s e a r c h and d e s i g n
institute
( p a r t o f t h e Romanian N a t i o n a l Water
Authority) reporting d i r e c t l y t o the
Permanent
E x e c u t i v e Body o f
the
Upper Mures P r o j e c t .
The E a s t e r n
Negev P r o j e c t
in
I s r a e l ( s e e Case
Study 2)
was
prepared
by
the
n a t i ona 1
water
planning
organization, although the p r o j e c t
was
r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l and t w o w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s e n g i n e e r s , one p r o g r a m m e r ,
and one s t u d e n t w e r e s u f f i c i e n t
to
t a k e c a r e o f t h e system d e s i g n .
Somewhat d i f f e r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n
may
be
encountered
in
other
countries.
For
implementation o f
t h e S t u d y o f D r i n k i n g Water S u p p l y

-28-

i n t h e p r o v i n c e o f South H o l l a n d
in
t h e N e t h e r l a n d s (see Case S t u d y 3 ) ,
distinction
was
made
between
governmental
p l a n n i n g and t e c h n i c a l
planning.
The f i r s t one has been
with
by
the
Steering
dea 1 t
C o m m i t t e e , whose members w e r e t o p
administrators
of
central
and
provincial
governments.
The
t e c h n i c a l p l a n n i n g h a s been c a r r i e d
o u t by several research i n s t i t u t i o n s
under
supervision of
the National
I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y .
Almost
all
the people c a r r y i n g out
the
s t u d y h a v e academic d e g r e e s .
The
disciplines
represented vary
from
mathematics
and
engineering
to
biology,
and t h e g r o u p
included
experts
on
the
recreational
behaviour o f the local population.

For t h e
Maumee R i v e r
Basin
S t u d y i n t h e USA (see Case S t u d y 41,
t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission
formed
a
planning
board,
with
members f r o m t h r e e s t a t e s and f o u r
federal
government a g e n c i e s .
In
a d d i t i o n t o the r e l a t i v e l y h i g h l y
s k i l l e d personnel
i n t h e s t a t e and
f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s , t h e Commission was
a s s i s t e d by a small
research
team
from a u n i v e r s i t y .
The

only
agency
directly
in
the
Metropolitan
A d e l a i d e Water
Resources Study
in
A u s t r a l i a (see Case S t u d y 5 ) was t h e
and
Water
Supply
Eng i n e e r i n g
Department
of
South
Australia,
r e s p o n s i b l e a t the time o f t h e study
t o t h e M i n i s t e r o f Works o f
the
Government o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a .
The
development
interacted
with
the
R i v e r M u r r a y Commission, a body o n
w h i c h t h e government o f
all
the
s t a t e s o f South A u s t r a l i a
involved
i n t h e s t u d y w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d as
w e l l as t h e F e d e r a l
Government o f
Australia.
The s k i l l e d p e r s o n n e l
involved
i n the planning process
were
eng i n e e r s
and
an
engineer-economist
of
the
above-mentioned Department.

i nvo 1v e d

The Susa R e s e a r c h Program

in
Denmark
( s e e Case S t u d y 7) was l e d
by
the
Danish
Commi t t e e
for
Hydrology.
The
subproject
c o n c e r n i ng
management
of
water
r e s o u r c e s was c a r r i e d o u t b y t h r e e

organizations - a research i n s t i t u t e
(university),
an
institute
for
a p p l i e d r e s e a r c h (commercial b a s i s ,
and
a
private,
nonprof i t ) ,
government-supported
agency
(nonprofit)

P l a n n i n g a system o f
flood
p r o t e c t i o n r e s e r v o i r s f o r t h e Sulm
Catchment i n t h e FRG ( s e e Case S t u d y
1) was c a r r i e d o u t b y t h e
local
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Bureau,
S t a t e Water
which m a i n t a i n s a s t a f f
capable o f
a1 1
technical
and
hand 1 i ng
administratve tasks.
The Bureau was
a
smal 1
team
of
a s s i s t e d by
u n i v e r s i t y research people.
The
great
v a r ie t y
of
organizational
involvement
is
evident,
and t h e examples
cited
above a r e j u s t some o f
t h e many
p o s s i b l e arrangements.
Most o f
the
agencies
were
assisted
i n the
planning
process
by
external
experts,
mostly from u n i v e r s i t i e s .
This
is
understandable,
s i nce
government
agencies
in
many
c o u n t r i e s have developed a s p e c i f i c
m i s s i o n or missions over t h e years.
To
ensure
the generation o f a
s u f f i c i e n t l y c o m p r e h e n s i v e p l a n and
t o provide f o r evaluation o f several
project options,
a m i x o f agencies
i s p r e f e r a b l e , u s u a l l y w i t h one o f
them e n t r u s t e d w i t h t h e l e a d e r s h i p
and c o o r d i n a t i o n r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .

2.6

Selection and utilization

of experts

I n the plan i n i t i a t i o n
and
preliminary
planning
phase,
it
becomes n e c e s s a r y a l s o t o e n s u r e
t h a t c o n t r b u t i o n s a r e made b y many
d if f erent
experts.
The
m u l t i d i s c i p i n a r y n a t u r e o f water
resources p anning n e c e s s i t a t e s t h a t
i n t e r d i s c i p i n a r y i n t e r a c t i o n should
t a k e p l a c e among them.
Usually the
r e s u l t s a r e more m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y
t h a n i n t e r d s c i p l i n a r y , meaning- t h a t
although t..ere
is
interaction, i t
t e n d s t o t a k e t h e shape
of
a
presentation
of
r e s u l t s by t h e
i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r t s as seen i n t h e
l i g h t o f t h e i r own e x p e r t i s e .
tnmn

nf

prerequisites

thn

mnet

i m n n r t a n t

f o r t h e success o f an

i n t e r d i s c i p i n a r y study
are
(1)
d e v e l o p i n g mutual
t r u s t among t h e
e x p e r t s and ( 2 ) h e l p i n g each e x p e r t
t o r e a l i z e t h a t w i t h i n h i s o r her
own d i s c i p i n e he
or
she
can
contribute
t o the overall
study
effort.
Thus each
recognizes
that
his or
her c o n t r i b u t i o n
i s being
1 istened
to
as
worthwhile.
Additional
conditions for
project
success
i nc 1 u d e
the
mutual
a
d e v e l o p m e n t among e x p e r t s
of
spirit
of
cooperation
and t h e
a b i l i t y t o overcome a n a t u r a l
bias
so t h a t
among
the
disciplines
d i f f e r e n t or opposing p o i n t s
of
view,
approaches,
and b e l i e f s w i l l
be t o l e r a t e d .
The t i m e needed f o r
these
conditions
t o d e v e l o p and
m a t u r e and t h e f a c t t h a t a l m o s t
e v e r y e x p e r t j o i n s t h e team w i t h h i s
o r h e r own p r e c o n c e i v e d n o t i o n o f
what c o n s t i t u t e s a p l a n n i n g s t u d y
may
explain
why,
during
the
p r e l i m i n a r y phase, much t i m e may be
spent i n p h i l o s o p h i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s
t h a t o f t e n seem t r i v i a l and e n d l e s s .
I t i s h e r e t h a t w e l l - d e v e l o p e d and
acceptable guidelines for
regional
or
river-basin
p l a n n i n g w o u l d have
t h e most i m p a c t o n s t r e a m l i n i n g such
c o s t l y , time-consuming debates.
U s u a l l y t h e r e a r e two major
groups o f e x p e r t s
involved
i n the
plan
initiation
and p r e l i m i n a r y
p l a n n i n g phase.
First,
there are
experts
who
are
capable
of
f o r m u l a t i n g t h e system
concepts.
They m u s t i n t e r a c t w i t h o t h e r g r o u p s
who h a v e e x p e r t i s e i n w a t e r s u p p l y ,
i n d u s t r i a l water
use,
irrigation,
hydro-power
production,
forestry,
and t h e l i k e .
I t i s of
utmost
i m p o r t a n c e t h a t t h e systems a n a l y s t s
and
disciplinary
experts
fully
u n d e r s t a n d t h e p r o j e c t p u r p o s e s and
is
especially
objectives.
This
important
when
the d i s c i p l i n a r y
experts
identify constraints that
r e d u c e t h e m o d e l i n g freedom o f
the
systems a n a l y s t s .
I t i s important
a l s o t o c o n s u l t e x p e r t s who a r e n o t
project-specific,
such as l a w y e r s ,
b i o l o g i s t s who
investigate
rare
species,
archeologists,
landscape
architects, etc.
The b u s i n e s s o f whom t o s e l e c t
i s i n p a r t d e t e r m i n e d by t h e l o c a l l y

a v a i l a b l e e x p e r t i s e and t h e scope o f
the
project.
Experts should b e
c a r e f u l l y s e l e c t e d , and i n q u i r i e s t o
their
f ormer
c u s t omer s
and
evaluation of
their
p r e v i o u s work
may b e v e r y u s e f u l
and a d v i s a b l e .
The m o s t
important expert
t o be
selected
i s the p r o j e c t leader.
He
must n o t o n l y be an e x p e r t i n w a t e r
resources
p l a n n i n g , h e must a l s o b e
a
leader.
His
talents
and
are
of
c r u c ia 1
persona 1 i t y
impor t a n c e
to
the
successf u1
compl e t i o n
of
the
planning
act i v i ties.

2.7 Public participation

For
the
purpose
of
this
s e c t i o n , t h e word p u b l i c r e f e r s t o
an i n d i v i d u a l o r a g r o u p n o t h a v i n g
the
governmental
decision-making
authority.
Public
participation
such
r e f e r s t o the a c t i v i t i e s of
i n d i v i d u a l s o r groups i n t r y i n g t o
influence decision-making.
Public
p a r t i c i p a t i o n should
not
be
a
one-way
street.
I t should not o n l y
b e a way o f
ascertaining d i f f e r e n t
views,
but
i t should also provide
those
whose
interests
may
be
a f f e c t e d an o p p o r t u n i t y t o
learn
a b o u t t h e d e c i s i o n s b e i n g made.
I t
i s i m p o r t a n t , however, t o f i n d a way
to
insure
that
e x p r e s s i o n and
consideration of
public viewpoints
do
not
improperly
impede
the
decision-making
process.
According
t o U.S.
sources
( N a t i o n a l Water
Commission
1973), d e t e r m i n i n g t h e
role
that
public
participation
should p l a y
in
water
resources
planning requires discovering
(a)
the l i m i t a t i o n s
inherent i n public
p a r t i c i p a t i o n , (b) t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s
t h a t m u s t b e met t o e n s u r e a d e q u a t e
participation,
and
(c)
how
that
p a r t i c i p a t i o n should be s t r u c t u r e d .
In
several
countries,
water
r e s o u r c e s management and p l a n n i n g i s
specialized
the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of
agencies
which
represent
the
i n t e r e s t s o f a l l w a t e r u s e r s and t h e
public a t
large.
The p u b l i c
is,
therefore,
represented
in
the
p l a n n i n g process by v i r t u e o f
the
fact that representatives of several
constituencies
serve on p r a c t i c a l l y
a1 1
governmental
and
1 oca 1

-30-

administration
agencies.
Such
agencies,
of
course,
must
listen
carefully
to
the
c o n c e r n s and
opinions voiced by the d i f f e r e n t
i n t e r e s t groups t h a t p r o v i d e t h i s
input
i n t o t h e p l a n n i n g process.
Concerning
the public a t
large,
it
e f f o r t s s h o u l d b e made t o keep
informed about t h e progress o f t h e
p r o j e c t b y p r e s e n t i n g i n t h e mass
media
( o r even a t s p e c i a l m e e t i n g s ,
such as a r e h e l d i n t h e N e t h e r l a n d s )
summaries o f
t h e "work
t o date."
Project
results
s h o u l d a l s o be
d i s s e m i n a t e d f o r p u b l i c s c r u t i n y and
comment t h r o u g h t h e v a r i o u s a g e n c i e s
involved i n the study.
I n some c a s e s , however, s p e c i a l
g r o u p s a r e formed,
such as
the
C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y Committee f o r t h e
Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y i n t h e USA
(see Case S t u d y 4 ) ,
w h i c h was a
formal
e n t i t y w i t h an a p p o i n t e d
membership.
These a p p o i n t m e n t s w e r e
made t h r o u g h v a r i o u s c i v i c g r o u p s ,
s u c h as t h e League o f Women V o t e r s ,
t h e S i e r r a Club, e t c .
W i t h such a
s t r o n g b a c k i n g from a b r o a d c i v i c
constituency, a formal
mandate t o
p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e p l a n n i n g process,
and a b u d g e t a l l o c a t e d f r o m t h e
project
planning
funds,
the
Committee was v o c a l and i n f l u e n t i a l .
There
are
other
ways
equally
effective,
e.g.,
the
citizens'
p a r t i c i p a t i o n done i n t h e F R G .
Although t h e forms o f
public
p a r t i c i p a t i o n may b e more o r l e s s
formalized i n d i f f e r e n t countries,
it i s
important, e s p e c i a l l y i n the
it
p l a n i n i t i a t i o n phase, t o expand
as
much
as
is
practical
and
reasonable.
I t should be recognized
t h a t t h e r e a r e no f i r m a p r i o r i
grounds
for
believing that
the
engineers o f a water
authority or
representatives
of
any
other
g o v e r n m e n t a l agency know f u l l y w h a t
t h e pub1 i c w a n t s and w h a t i s " b e s t "
f o r the public.

2.8

Preliminary selection of
systems analysis tools

The p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s s h o u l d be
d r i v e n b y t h e g o a l s , o b j e c t i v e s , and
issues
of
concern
and n o t by
s p e c i f i c p l a n n i n g methodologies t h a t

the planners are acquainted w i t h .

According
to
Miser
(1982),
six
p r i n c i p l e s of
t h a t c h o i c e may b e
enunciated.
Analytic
tools should
be chosen t h a t a r e
1 . a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e p r o b l e m and
t o the prospective solutions
t h a t may emerge.
2. matched a p p r o p r i a t e l y t o t h e
available
data,
since
an
a t t r a c t i v e method t h a t c a l l s
for
n o n e x i s t e n t data cannot
yield trustworthy results.

3. i n t e r n a l l y

consistent
(the
s o p h i s t i c a t e d a n a l y s i s o f one
p a r t s h o u l d n o t b e bludgeoned
in
by
hazy
specu 1 a t i o n
another).

4. b a l a n c e d i n d e t a i l and a c c u r a c y
(if
one
enters
with
order-of-magnitude
estimates,
one i s seldom e n t i t l e d t o f i v e figure
accuracy
in
the
resul ts,
or,
if
accurate
e s t i m a t e s a r e combined
with
very
questionable estimates,
t h i s f a c t s h o u l d be r e f l e c t e d
in
how
the
results
are
presented).

5.

appropriately interdisciplinary
i n t h e l i g h t o f an a p p r e c i a t i o n
o f t h e problem w i t h which t h e
work
began
and
is
being
continued.

6. appropriate,

if
at
a1 1
possible,
t o t h e process o f
p r e s e n t i ng t h e f i nd i ngs t h a t
w i l l emerge a t t h e end o f
the
p l a n n i n g study ( t h e c l i e n t w i l l
surely
n o t want
t o poke i n t o
d e t a i l s , b u t some u n d e r s t a n d i n g
tool s
has
of
t h e ana 1 y t i c
p e r s u a s i v e v a l u e f o r many u s e r s
o f systems a n a l y s i s r e s u l t s ) .

Additional advice i s offered by

R a i f f a (1982) c o n c e r n i n g t h e u s e o f
models
in
systems a n a l y s i s and
planning e f f o r t s :
I n modeling r e a l i t y f o r p o l i c y
guidance t h e r e a r e a host o f
options t o consider.
F i r s t of
a1 1
some a d v i c e :
Beware o f

-31-

g e n e r a l purpose g r a n d i o s e models
that
try
to
incorporate
p r a c t i c a l l y everything.
Such
are
difficult
to
mode 1 s
Val i d a t e ,
to
interpret,
to
cal ibrate
statistically,
to
m a n i p u l a t e , and m o s t i m p o r t a n t l y
t o explain.
You may be b e t t e r
off
n o t w i t h o n e b i g model b u t
with a set of
simpler
models,
off
with
simple
starting
deterministic
ones
and
c o m p l i c a t i n g t h e model i n s t a g e s
as s e n s i t i v i t y
a n a l y s i s shows
t h e need f o r s u c h c o m p l i c a t i o n s .
A model does n o t have t o a d d r e s s
a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e problem.
I t
s h o u l d be d e s i g n e d t o a i d i n
understanding
the
dynami c
interactions of
some p h a s e o f
your problem.
O t h e r models c a n
a d d r e s s o t h e r phases.
Although s e l e c t i o n o f
methods
and systems a n a l y s i s t o o l s t o b e
employed f o r p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g s h o u l d
n o t b e done t o o e a r l y ,
the plan
i n i t i a t i o n and p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g
phase
should
involve
some
p r e l i m i n a r y work c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r
choice.
The e x t e n t o f
t h i s work
depends o n t h e c h a r a c t e r and t h e
scope o f t h e p r o j e c t and o n s e v e r a l
o t h e r f a c t o r s , b u t most o f t e n t h e r e
are i n i t i a l l y a few (i.e., not too
many) i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e f a m i l i a r
not only with the subject matter o f
the p r o j e c t i n question b u t also
w i t h systems a n a l y s i s and i t s t o o l s .
They
s h o u l d e x a m i n e what a n a l y t i c
methods r e l a t e d t o t h e p r o j e c t a r e
( i n c l ud i ng
a v a i 1 ab1 e
read i 1y
e x a m i n a t i o n o f computer h a r d w a r e and
software),
what a d a p t i o n s and new
m e t h o d o l o g i c a l developments m i g h t be
necessary,
and w h a t manpower and
computa t i ona 1
and
f i nanc i a1
r e s o u r c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o do t h e
job.
The d a t a a v a i l a b l e and t i m e
c o n s t r a i n t s are important f a c t o r s i n
such a n a n a l y s i s .
Final selection
t o o l s and methods t o be used i n d a t a
and
man i pu 1 a t i o n ,
p r o c e s s i ng,
interpretation
i s almost always a
compromise between w h a t one w a n t s t o
d o and w h a t one c a n do under
given
circumstances.
Frequently
it is
usef u1
to
make
some
back-of-the-envelope
calculations
based o n s i m p l i f i e d a s s u m p t i o n s j u s t

t o g e t an
i d e a o f what
can be
expected
i f more e l a b o r a t e methods
a r e t o be u s e d .

al 1
case
studies
Almost
examined
i n t h i s book i n d i c a t e t h a t
the selection of
systems a n a l y s i s
tools
and
development
of
the
will
be
methodological
approach
accompanied
by
some
disputes,
e s p e c i a l l y i f a p p l i c a t i o n o f some o f
the
more
advanced
methods
is
considered
(e.g.,
the
surrogate
worth trade-off
method a p p l i e d i n
t h e Maumee R i v e r
Basin
Study).
However,
even
in
case
of
considerable
disagreement on t h e
methodology
to
be
used,
such
d i s p u t e s c a n have a p o s i t i v e e f f e c t
on
t h e u l t i m a t e outcome o f
the
anal ys i s.
What a r e t h e m a j o r q u e s t i o n s t o
be a d d r e s s e d i n t h e
preliminary
s e l e c t i o n o f systems a n a l y s i s t o o l s ?
One o f
t h e most c r i t i c a l q u e s t i o n s
is
how
to
handle
project
u n c e r t a i n t i e s due t o t h e s h o r t and
long-term
variability
of
water
resources
(primarily
precipitation
and
s t r e a m f low)
But
the
u n c e r t a i n t y issue i s not l i m i t e d t o
h y d r o l o g i c processes:
it relates
a l s o t o p r o j e c t objectives, water
demand p r o j e c t i o n s ,
and
severa 1
other
factors
embedded
in the
socioeconomic c o n t e x t o f
a given
project.
Another
typical
question
is
whether
alternative
project
s o l u t i o n s s h o u l d b e examined and
compared
by
simulation,
or
the
"best"
s o l u t i on
be
directly
i d e n t i f i e d b y a p p l i c a t i o n o f one o f
the
optimization
techniques.
In
case o f
more
complex
planning
efforts,
simulation
i s usually a
more p r e f e r a b l e a p p r o a c h ; h o w e v e r ,
quite often simulation
i s coupled
with
some
kind
of
sca 1a r
(s ingl e-obj e c t ive)
or
vector
o p t i m i z a t ion,
(mu1 t i p l e - o b j e c t i v e )
e.g.,
f o r o p t i m i z a t i o n of w a t e r
resources
allocation
at
each
s i m u l a t i o n step.

The p r o b l e m o f
the
systems
analyst
is to find that particular
tool or
set of
tools that w i l l
correspond best t o
the
project
needs.

2.9

References

H i t c h , C.J.
1981. On t h e c h o i c e
of
objectives
in
systems
studies.
I n Systems:
Research
and D e s i g n .
Proceedings o f the
F i r s t Systems Symposium a t Case
I n s t i t u t e o f Technology, e d i t e d
Eckmann:
Wiley,
New
b y D.P.
York.

1977. M u l t i o b j e c t i v e s
Major, D.C.
Water R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g , Water
R e s o u r c e s Monograph No.
4.
American
Geophysical
Union,
W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.
Miser,
H.J.,
and
E.S.
Quade,
(eds.)
1984.
Handbook o f
Analysis.
S y s t ems
N o r t h - H o l l a n d , New York

1973.
N a t i o n a l Water
Commission.
Water
P o l i c i e s f o r the Future.
Final Report t o the President
and t o . t h e Congress
of
the
U n i t e d S t a t e s by t h e N a t i o n a l
Water
Cornmission,
Washington,
D.C.

Quade, E .
S.
1980.
Pitfalls
in
f o r m u l a t i o n and m o d e l i n g .
In
P i t f a l l s o f A n a l y s i s , e d i t e d by
G.
M a j o n e and E .
S.
Quade.
W i l e y , New Y o r k .

1982. P o l i c y A n a l y s i s .
R a i f f a , H.
A Checklist of
Concerns,
pp.
82-2,
International
Institute
for
A p p l i e d Systems A n a l y s i s ,
Laxenburg, A u s t r i a .
1964. On t h e c o n c e p t o f
Simon, H.
organization
goal.
Administrative
Sc i ence
Quarterly g(1).
Wiener,
A.
1972.
The R o l e o f
..
Water
in
Development.
M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

3. Data collection and processing

Chapter
3 i s concerned w i t h
data collection
and
processing,
the
w h i c h c o n s t i t u t e Stage 2 o f
p l a n n i n g process.
I n t h i s stage the
d a t a needed f o r t h e p r o j e c t s h o u l d
be c o l l e c t e d and t h e i r q u a l i t y and
quantity
evaluated,
and d e c i s i o n s
s h o u l d b e made o n t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f
additional
data
concerning
the
h y d r o l o g i c regime o f
the
water
bodies,
w a t e r q u a l i t y , w a t e r use,
and a l t e r n a t i v e ways o f
project
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n d i t s o p e r a t i o n as
w e l l as d e m o g r a p h i c a l ,
economical,
and e c o l o g i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n .
The d a t a c o l l e c t i o n
process
r e q u i r e s l i s t i n g o f sources o f d a t a ,
exploration
of
these
sources,
i n q u i r i e s about o t h e r p o s s i b l e d a t a
sources, e v a l u a t i o n o f data q u a l i t y ,
and t a b u l a t i o n o f d a t a f o r t h e i r
final
processing.
This
process
i n v o l v e s many e x p e r t s , because t h e
data
collected
must
be
purpose-oriented.
The p u r p o s e must
govern t h e type, t h e accuracy,
and
t h e time h o r i z o n o f the data.
For
example, d a t a needs f o r n a t i o n a l o r
regional
l o n g - t e r m water r e s o u r c e s
planning are
discussed
in
the
handbook
for national evaluation of
water
resources
assessment
a c t i v i t i e s (Unesco/WMO 198 1)

3.1 Specification of data needs

When t h e p l a n i n i t i a t i o n and
preliminary
planning
result
in
a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o proceed f u r t h e r ,
the planning e f f o r t enters the data
c o l l e c t i o n and p r o c e s s i n g
phase.
Always
some
data
are
already
available
from
the
preliminary
p l a n n i n g a n a l y s e s , b u t i n m o s t cases
they a r e i n s u f f i c i e n t f o r g e n e r a t i o n
of
project alternatives
and t h e i r
A t t h i s p o i n t a more
evaluation.
complete
data
base
is
needed
( c o n c e r n i n g h y d r o l o g i c d a t a see, f o r
example,
Andrejanov
1975)
In
principle,
there are three possible
s i t u a t i o n s concerning c o l l e c t i o n of

additional
data.
F i r s t , we c o l l e c t
w h a t e v e r i s a l r e a d y a v a i l a b l e and
pertinent
to
the project goals
without
initiating
any
specific
f i e l d measurement p r o g r a m s .
Second,
i t may b e f o u n d t h a t t h e a v a i l a b l e
data are very
l i m i t e d and f u r t h e r
planning requires that additional
observations
and measurements b e
made.
i n t h i s case t h e p r o b a b l e
opportunity
loss o f
delaying the
p r o j e c t u n t i l enough a d d i t i o n a l d a t a
are
c o l l e c t e d must be c a r e f u l l y
evaluated, t a k i n g i n t o account what
risks of
p r o j e c t inadequacy c a n b e
accepted.
Finally,
the
third
possible situation
i s a mix o f t h e
two o t h e r :
the a v a i l a b l e d a t a base
i s s u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h some a d d i t i o n a l
information collected
in the f i e l d
highly
b y means o f ad hoc and
s e l e c t i v e measurement p r o g r a m s o f
s h o r t d u r a t i on.

To w h a t
extent
an
actual
s i t u a t i o n c o r r e s p o n d s t o one o f t h e
t h r e e p o s s i b i l i t i e s m e n t i o n e d above
depends v e r y much o n t h e a g r e e m e n t
of
the
experts
i n v o 1v e d
in
preparation of a plan.
As p o i n t e d
o u t i n Chapter
2,
expert opinions
c o n c e r n i n g d a t a needs may v a r y q u i t e
widely.
E x p e r t s w i t h know-how i n
t h e t e c h n i c a l d i s c i p l i n e s may p r e s s
f o r much more d e t a i l e d d a t a t h a n i s
required by the p r o j e c t goals, which
a r e u n d e r s t o o d b e t t e r by t h e systems
analysts.
On
the
other
hand,
systems
a n a l y s t s m u s t remember t h a t
t h e i r methods can h a r d l y be u s e d t o
prescribe
a p p r o p r i a t e courses of
a c t i o n i f t h e y a r e n o t based on a n
a d e q u a t e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e way t h e
system w o r k s .
Data
availability
places r e s t r i c t i o n s on the a n a l y t i c
methods t h a t c a n b e u s e d
in
a
specific situation.
Hence, t h e d a t a
and t h e i r
a c c u r a c y m u s t be s u b j e c t
t o open d i s c u s s i o n b y a l l c o n c e r n e d .
I n i t i a l l y , these d i s c u s s i o n s should
be
kept
at a strategic
level,
above
a1 1
that
remember i n g

-34-

evaluation
of
d a t a needs
is a
process i n i t s e l f ,
and s e v e r a l
of
the
questions
concerning
data
adequacy c a n n o t be answered p r i o r t o
c r i t i c a l a p p r a i s a l of t h e r e s u l t s o f
t h e f i r s t model r u n s .
The a d v a n t a g e s o f m a t h e m a t i c a l
i n many
models
are
recognized
c o u n t r i e s a l l over t h e w o r l d .
The
models,
however,
cannot be f u l l y
effective without
adequate d a t a t o
s u p p o r t them
(model
development,
calibration,
validation,
and
ultimate application).
T h i s i s why
t h e d a t a - g a t h e r i n g p r o c e s s s h o u l d be
r e l a t e d more d i r e c t l y t o t h e needs
of
models.
Subsequent
t o the
acceptance o f t h e p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s
and m e t h o d o l o g y by a l l
e x p e r t s on
the
planning
team,
the
data
c o n t r i b u t o r s must u n d e r s t a n d
and
a c c e p t t h a t t h e systems a n a l y s t ( t h e
model
builder)
sets
the
data
requirements.

3.2

Data adequacy

Virtually a l l
h y d r o l o g i c and
n o n h y d r o l o g i c d a t a can b e c o n s i d e r e d
t o be inadequate
i n some r e s p e c t .
The q u e s t i o n
i s , how i n a d e q u a t e i s
inadequate, o r ,
alternatively,
how
adequate
i s adequate?
( W a t t and
1973).
To answer t h i s
Wilson,
q u e s t i o n i t i s necessary t o d e f i n e
t h e purpose f o r which the d a t a a r e
t o b e u s e d and t h e c o n s e q u e n c i e s o f
v a r i ous
degrees
of
data
In
other
words,
imperfect ion.
assessment
of
data
sufficiency
should be
based
not
only
on
p r o b a b i l i s t i c statements r e l a t e d t o
s a m p l i n g and p a r a m e t e r u n c e r t a i n t y
e r r o r s b u t a l s o o n an e v a l u a t i o n o f
how s e n s i t i v e a r e t h e key p r o j e c t
parameters
( i n economic and o v e r a l l
performance
terms)
to
possible
changes i n t h e d a t a base a c c u r a c y
From
a conceptual
and
scope.
standpoint,
the
data
can
be
considered
adequate
when
the
marginal
cost
associated
with
improving t h e d a t a i s equal t o t h e
marginal
benefits attributable t o
As a p r a c t i c a l
s u c h improvement.
matter,
however,
implementation of
t h i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d concept i s v e r y
d i f f i c u l t because o f
uncertainties
in
the
evaluation
of
future
benef it s .

I t
is
worth
noting
that
adequacy o f d a t a i s a l s o a f u n c t i o n
o f t h e methods used f o r p l a n n i n g and
decision-making.
I f a project i s
planned
to
accommodate
future
adaptations
t o revised objectives
and new i n f o r m a t i o n , l a r g e r e r r o r s
i n the estimates o f
key p r o j e c t
p a r a m e t e r s may be t o l e r a t e d .
I f no
such accommodations a r e i n c l u d e d i n
t h e p l a n - a common a p p r o a c h b y
t h o s e who
l i k e t o s o l v e problems
once and f o r
all
- much s m a l l e r
e r r o r s s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t h a n i n t h e
case o f f l e x i b l e , a d a p t i v e p l a n n i n g
( Y e v j e v i c h 1973).
When t h e g e n e r a l
circumstances
a r e such t h a t a p l a n i s needed, i t
i s the r o l e o f the water
resources
planner
t o develop the best plan
possible f o r the a v a i l a b l e data.
I t
i s t r u e t h a t many p l a n s f o r w a t e r
resources p r o j e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n
developing countries,
a r e proposed
a t t i m e s when t h e h y d r o l o g i c and
n o n h y d r o l o g i c d a t a base
is
far
smaller
t h a n what w o u l d be d e s i r e d
for
an
e f f e c t iv e
analysi s.
Nevertheless,
w h i l e t h e p l a n n e r may
p r o p e r l y a d v i s e as
t o the r i s k s
i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g w i t h inadequate
data,
he w i l l
r a r e l y be
in
a
position
to
suspend
planning
a c t i v i t i e s u n t i l more d e t a i l e d d a t a
are available.
Quite often it i s
d i f f i c u l t t o postpone a
project
because o f
political
pressures o r
t h e e x i s t e n c e o f problems r e q u i r i n g
immediate
action.
In
such
situations
it
is
always
worth
considering
the possibilities' of
implementing t h e p r o j e c t i n stages,
a1 though
this
always
incurs
additional
c o s t , even i f s t a g i n g i s
it
technically feasible
(sometimes
i s not)
The o t h e r p o s s i b i 1 i t y i s
t o d e s i g n a p r o j e c t i n such a way
t h a t e v e n t u a l l o s s e s due t o t h e u s e
of
imperfect
data
are
simply
minimized.

As a m a t t e r o f f a c t , t h e i s s u e s
discussed i n t h i s s e c t i o n a r e n o t
o n l y t h e q u e s t i o n o f d a t a adequacy i t i s a " w a i t a w h i l e " syndrome i n
anticipation that uncertainty
about
some
of
the
crucial
factors
be
influencing project design w i l l
But u s u a l l y w a i t i n g w i l l
reduced.
n o t improve t h i n g s and,
w i t h the

-35-

passage
of
time,
u n c e r t a i n t y emerge.

new

clouds

of

The case s t u d i e s appended t o

t h i s book
indicate that
i n many
planning e f f o r t s only e x i s t i n g data
a r e used.
Q u i t e often they are
subject t o intensive processing t h a t
its
purpose
a
better
has as
evaluation of
t h e r i s k s due t o a l l
types o f uncertainties,
including
t h o s e due t o i m p e r f e c t i o n s
i n the
p r o j e c t d a t a base.

n o t h i n g about d a t a
compiled
nongovernmental i n s t i t u t i o n s .

by

Generally i t i s advisable a l s o
t o search f o r unusual d a t a sources,
such as newspaper
accounts,
older
residents'
memories,
tree rings,
glacier deposits, etc.
For e x a m p l e ,
h i g h - w a t e r marks a l o n g r i v e r s may b e
useful i n d e l i n e a t i n g flooded areas.
Such marks, i f t a k e n c a r e f u l l y ,
may
be u s e d w i t h o t h e r d a t a t o compute
peak d i s c h a r g e s o f
t h e stream by
i n d i r e c t methods (WMO 1974).

3.3 Data acquisition

As a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d i n t h e
f i r s t section o f t h i s chapter,
the
t e r m d a t a a c q u i s i t i o n has d i f f e r e n t
c o n n o t a t i o n s t h a t depend o n
the
actual
s i t u a t i o n concerning data
availability.
The methods o f
field
c o l l e c t i o n o f d a t a on t h e e l e m e n t s
of
the
hydrological
cycle
and
related factors
f a l l outside the
scope
of
this
book.
Several
manuals,
i n c l u d i n g those p u b l i s h e d
by
the
World
Meteorological
O r g a n i z a t i o n (e.g.,
WHO 1 9 7 2 ) .
are
available
on
this
subject.
Moreover,
in
most
countries
collection of
f i e l d data
is
a
responsibility
of
spec i a 1 i zed
hydrometeorologica-1
services,
and
t h e y s h o u l d be c o n s u l t e d i f t h e need
for
additional
f i e l d data arises.
The a c q u i s i t i o n o f
hydrologic data
means,
above a l l ,
the l o c a t i o n o f
the
data
sources
i nc 1 ud i ng
i n s p e c t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e s e
d a t a as t o t h e i r
s u i t a b i l i t y and
sufficiency for
s p e c i f i c planning
effort.
Although
it
i s an a r b i t r a r y
division,
h y d r o l o g i c data sources
may be d i v i d e d
into
usual
and
ones.
The
usual data
unusua 1
sources
include hydrological
and
m e t e o r o l o g i c a l y e a r b o o k s , r e p o r t s by
v a r i o u s types o f
e x p e r i m e n t a l and
r e s e a r c h s t a t i o n s , r e c o r d s k e p t by
r e g i o n a l w a t e r a u t h o r i t i e s , and t h e
like.
I t s h o u l d b e remembered t h a t
many o r g a n i z a t i o n s a r e o f t e n a l m o s t
c o m p l e t e l y unaware o f d a t a c o l l e c t e d
by
others;
even
governmental
agencies
o f t e n know v e r y
little
about d a t a
collected
by
other
governmental
a g e n c i e s and a l m o s t

Collection of
hydrologic data
s h o u l d n o t be l i m i t e d t o d y n a m i c
processes
such
as
streamflow,
precipitation,
evapotranspiration,
groundwater
flow,
or s o i l moisture
changes;
static
physical
basin
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s h o u l d a l s o be t a k e n
i n t o a c c o u n t (e.g.,
characteristics
to
be
used
i n rainfall-runoff
models).
Basin c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e
usually
grouped
into
three
categories:
(1)
topographic,
(2)
s o i l s and g e o l o g y ,
and
(3) l a n d
c o v e r and l a n d - u s e .
I n f o r m a t i o n on
these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
i s commonly
a v a i l a b l e from t h e v a r i o u s t y p e s of
maps ( t o p o g r a p h i c , s o i l , l a n d c o v e r ,
etc.)
t h a t are available through
a p p r o p r i a t e governmental
agencies.
When n o s u i t a b l e maps e x i s t f o r
an
area,
i t i s recommended t o c h e c k
w h e t h e r some r e m o t e l y sensed d a t a
are
available.
These d a t a may
include
conventional
large-scale
black-and-white a e r i a l
photographs,
h i g h - a l t i tude
color-infrared
Lansat
photographs,
and
multispectral
imagery.
Severa 1
manuals a r e a v a i l a b l e t o a s s i s t i n
a c q u i r i n g d i f f e r e n t i n f o r m a t i o n from
r e m o t e l y sensed d a t e
(e.g.,
Avery
1977)

A 1 though
collection
of
hydrologic
data
presents
many
problems, a c q u i s i t i o n o f water-use
data
i s u s u a l l y a much more c o m p l e x
task.
P r o b l e m s stemming from t h e
scarcity
of
water-use
data are
s e r i ous,
especial l y
at
the
individual
activity
l e v e l (a f a r m ,
industrial
enterprise,
or
household).
As t h i n g s now s t a n d , i t
i s widely
i f not universally true
they e x i s t a t
t h a t these data, i f

all,
c a n be c o l l e c t e d o n l y f r o m t h e
w a t e r - u s e r s themselves.

As p o i n t e d o u t b y K i n d l e r and
(19841,
water-use
data
Russel 1
requirements vary according t o the
approach taken toward r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
o f w a t e r use i n t h e p l a n n i n g e f f o r t .
T h e r e a r e two b r o a d a p p r o a c h e s used.
The f i r s t one r e q u i r e s d a t a o n a s e t
o f s e v e r a l i n p u t s t o each w a t e r - u s e
activity
(incuding
the
water
i t s e l f ) , each a c t i v i t y ' s a s s o c i a t e d
p r i c e s and c o s t s , and a s e t o f t o t a l
including
outputs
of
outputs ,
pollution,
with their
associated
p r i c e s and c o s t s .
Such d a t a can
o n l y come f r o m r e p e a t e d o b s e r v a t i o n
of
t h e same w a t e r - u s e r
over time
(say, m o n t h l y
t o t a l s over
several
years)
o r simultaneous o b s e r v a t i o n
o f many u s e r s o f t h e same s o r t a t
t h e same t i m e ( s a y 50 o r so u s e r s ) .
For s e l f - e v i d e n t reasons t h e f i r s t
source
i s known as a t i m e s e r i e s ,
t h e second as a c r o s s
section.
Under
c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s and u s i n g
c o r r e c t techniques, i t
i s possible
to
pool
the
time
s e r i e s and
SO
that
cross-sectional
data,
several
i n a d e q u a t e d a t a s e t s may be
combined i n t o one w i t h enough s i z e
and v a r i a t i o n t o b e h e l p f u l (see,
f o r example, J o h n s t o n 1 9 7 2 ) .
But,
under
a l l circumstances,
extreme
c a r e must be e x e r c i s e d
in
the
interpretation
of
the available
s t a t i s t i c a l information,
especially
t h e p r i c e - q u a n t i t y d a t a (see K i n d l e r
and R u s s e l l 1984 f o r more d e t a i l ) .
The
second
approach
is
d e t e r m i n e d by t h e p r o c e s s f o r w h i c h
t h e w a t e r i s used.
I t requires data
o n w h a t i s g o i n g o n w i t h i n and among
t h e many u n i t p r o c e s s e s o f a s i n g l e
water-use a c t i v i t y .
T h i s approach
amounts
to
a summation o f a l l
i n d i v i d u a l w a t e r demands w h i c h can
produce
a
large
number
of
a l t e r n a t i v e a c t i v i t y designs.
These
i n t u r n can be used t o
designs
d e f i n e w a t e r - u s e r e l a t i o n s and u n i t
water-use
coefficients for specific
a c t i v i t i e s such as s t e e l
rolling,
paper
production,
household water
u s e , and t h e l i k e .

both

Water r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g needs
h y d r o l o g i c and n o n h y d r o l o g i c

(among them,
water-use)
data.
I t
s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e s e two
b r o a d d a t a s e t s s h o u l d be m u t u a l l y
c o n s i s t e n t i f t h e y a r e used i n t h e
same model.
Spending u n j u s t i f i e d
t i m e and r e s o u r c e s , f o r i n s t a n c e , o n
t h e r e f i n e m e n t and
improvement o f
t h e h y d r o l o g i c d a t a base a t t h e
expense o f t h e d e p t h and scope o f
other
nonhydrological
data should
a l w a y s be a v o i d e d .
I n o t h e r words,
do n o t t r y t o
i m p r o v e one s e t o f
if
another
set of
equal
data
importance
to
the
model,
for
w h a t e v e r r e a s o n s , i s bad.
One o f
t h e common
problems
which
make
data
acquisition
difficult
i s that hydrologic data
a r e always c o l l e c t e d w i t h i n
the
w a t e r shed
boundaries,
while
nonhydrologic data u s u a l l y r e f e r
to
different
spatial units that follow
the
political
and
econom i c
subdivisions
of
t h e a r e a under
consideration.
A d j u s t m e n t s m u s t be
made
to
make a l l ' p r o j e c t d a t a
c o m p a t i b l e i n t i m e and space.

3.4 Data quality control

In
this
chapter,
quality
control
connotes t h e steps t h a t
s h o u l d be t a k e n t o e n s u r e t h a t d a t a
of
good q u a l i t y a r e used i n t h e
p r e p a r a t i o n o f a p l a n . These s t e p s
u s u a l l y include preliminary checking
o f d a t a and d e t e c t i o n o f e r r o r s b y
i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y checks.
The
p r e l i m i n a r y c h e c k i n g must e n s u r e t h e
o v e r a l l correctness o f
indicative
i n f o r m a t i o n ; s i m p l e g e o g r a p h i c a l and
arithmetical
checks
should
be
a p p l i e d t o see i f t h e d a t a p r o v i d e
an a p p r o p r i a t e l o n g - t e r m p i c t u r e o f
p a s t events concerning b o t h water
a v a i l a b i l i t y and w a t e r
use i n t h e
r e g i o n under c o n s i d e r a t i o n .
In this
p r o c e s s , d a t a gaps w h i c h may a f f e c t
outcomes o f
the p l a n should
be
i d e n t i f i e d , and t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f
f i l l i n g s u c h gaps b y e s t i m a t i o n o r
i n t e r p o l a t i o n s h o u l d be a n a l y z e d .
I t should b e noted t h a t f r e q u e n t l y
such a n a l y s i s
i s t o o complex t o b e
done
manually,
and
not
much
p r e l i m i n a r y c h e c k i n g can b e done
before the data are transferred i n t o
the
computer
and
prepared f o r
machine p r o c e s s i n g .

D a t a i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s a r e most
o f t e n due t o measurement e r r o r s o r
measurement b e i n g c r e d i t e d t o t h e
wrong t i m e , b u t c a u t i o n i s u r g e d i n
making d a t a a d j u s t m e n t s t o o e a s i l y
without
s o l i d r e f l e c t i o n as t o t h e
p o s s i b l e sources o f e r r o r .
should
Data q u a l i t y c o n t r o l
i nc 1 ude
check i n g
how
also
representative are the data f o r
the
current hydrological conditions i n a
given
b a s i n.
This
pertains
e s p e c i a l l y t o streamflow series i n a
basin
subject
to
large-scale
man-made
changes,
e.g.,
by
deforestation
or
strip
mining.
A l t h o u g h r e l a t i v e - l y l o n g r e c o r d s may
b e a v a i l a b l e , t h e y can no l o n g e r b e
considered
representative
unless
man-made changes i n t h e b a s i n have
taken
into
been
appropr ia t e 1 y
account, which
i s usually a very
d i f f i c u l t task.
Techniques f o r q u a l i t y c o n t r o l
o f data d i f f e r
for various data
types.
For example, t h e q u a l i t y o f
streamflow records f o r
a
given
s t r e a m may be checked by c o m p a r i n g
them w i t h c o n c u r r e n t
records f o r
n e a r b y s t r e a m s and w i t h c o n c u r r e n t l y
recorded
other
hydrologic
parameters,
such as p r e c i p i t a t i o n
and t e m p e r a t u r e
(WMO 1 9 7 4 ) .
The
of f l o o d h y d r o g r a p h s i s
routing
flood
o f t e n used
for
checking
discharges
recorded a t d f f erent
stream.
profiles
a l o n g t h e same
Groundwater
level
f l u c t u a t ons may
a l s o b e used i n q u a l i t y con r o l of
p r e c i p i t a t i o n and s t r e a m f l o w d a t a .
The d a t a a c c u r a c y r e q u r emen t s
should
be
consistent
w t h the
q u a l i t y and s a m p l i n g adequacy o f t h e
d a t a u s e d and w i t h t h e d e g r e e o f
a c c u r a c y r e q u i r e d by t h e s p e c i f i c
analysis.
In
many
instances,
graphical
and
r e l a t i v e l y simple
computa t i ona 1
methods
are
s u f f i c i e n t l y accurate f o r the data
and p u r p o s e s i n v o l v e d .

3.5

Data processing and

screening

I n many c a s e s i t i s n e c e s s a r y
t o process c o l l e c t e d data
into a
form compatible w i t h requirements o f

t h e methods a d o p t e d f o r
preparation
of
a plan.
Data p r o c e s s i n g u s u a l l y
includes s t a t i s t i c a l analysis,
such
as c o m p u t a t i o n o f
means, s t a n d a r d
deviations,
correlation
c o e f f i c i e n t s , l a g times,
parameters
f r equency
distributions,
of
durations,
and o t h e r
statistical
parameters
describing
both
the
temporal
and s p a t i a l
s t r u c t u r e of
t h e processes t h a t determine water
a v a i l a b i l i t y and w a t e r
use
in a
given
region.
Several
of
these
s t a t i s t i c s a r e used f o r f i l l i n g d a t a
gaps b y r e g r e s s i o n and c o r r e l a t i o n
methods.
Data p r o c e s s i n g a l s o o f t e n
includes conversion o f
data
into
and
compatible
time
s c a 1 es
c o n s i s t e n t measurement u n i t s
(e.g.,
c o n v e r s i o n o f mean f l o w i n t e n s i t i e s
i n t o f l o w volumes o v e r a p e r i o d o f
time)

One
of
the
purposes
of
statistical
data
processing
is
screening
of
data
to
obtain
h o m o g e n e i t y among d a t a o f v a r i o u s
kinds.
Screening
g e n e r a l l y has
t h r e e purposes.
One p u r p o s e
is to
reduce t h e d a t a t o t h e s t a n d a r d base
p e r i o d of r e c o r d .
T h i s i s necessary
because
a
frequent
problem i n
generalization of
hydrologic
and
n o n h y d r o l o g i c d a t a stems f r o m t h e
f a c t t h a t they
refer
to' different
of r e c o r d .
Attempts
to
periods
compare
records
without
making
appropriate adjustments w i l l
mix
v a r i a t i o n i n space w i t h v a r i a t i o n i n
time.
The second p u r p o s e
is to
eliminate or
reduce t h e e f f e c t s o f
inconsistencies
i n data
records.
S i m p l e examples o f
such s c r e e n i n g
p r o c e d u r e s a r e a double-mass
curve
(WMO
1974) a p p l i e d t o
analysis
detect
change o f
exposure a t
a
p r e c i p i t a t i o n s t a t i o n and a t i m e
s e r i e s a n a l y s i s u s e d t o e v a l u a t e how
accurately
streamflow
records
represent the natural
runoff
of
a
catchment area.
The t h i r d p u r p o s e
i s data reconciliation,
since data
from d i f f e r e n t sources r e l a t i n g t o
t h e same v a r i a b l e may n o t b e t h e
same o r e v e n c o m p a t i b l e .
Therefore,
one m u s t r e c o n c i l e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s
and come t o an e x p l i c i t d e c i s i o n
about what t o u s e as p l a n n i n g d a t a .
Examples i n c l u d e d i f f e r e n c e s
among
hydrologic
data
collected

-38-

concurrently by d i f f e r e n t hydrologic
agencies,
population
projections
made b y a p p l i c a t i o n o f
different
methods or a c c o r d i n g t o d i f f e r e n t
spatial
u n i t s , or monthly data t h a t
d o n o t add up t o same t o t a l as d a t a
from a d i f f e r e n t source t h a t gives
t h e d a t a as a n a n n u a l b a s i s .
The
data
processing
and
needs
are
highly
s c r e e n i ng
s i t u a t i o n - d e p e n d e n t , and t h e
level
of
effort
i s g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by
w h e t h e r o r n o t a p p r o p r i a t e computer
f a c i l i t i e s are available.
,

3.6 Data information systems

Data systems v a r y c o n s i d e r a b l y ,
d e p e n d i n g on t h e c h a r a c t e r and scope
of
the specific planning e f f o r t .
For
long-range
planning,
steady
accumulation,
a n a l y s i s , and d i s p l a y
o f d a t a o v e r p e r i o d s o f h o u r s , days,
o r months
is
sufficient,
while
operational
p l a n n i n g r e q u i r e s more
1 ess
immediate
r e c e ip t ,
or
processing,
and r e t r a n s m i t t a l
of
information.
Therefore,
wh l e
s e r v i n g one f u n c t i o n a l need w e l l ,
a
d a t a s y s t e m does n o t n e c e s s a r 1 Y
serve another.
What t y p e o f
data
informat on
s y s t e m i s a d v i s a b l e f o r a g i v e n p an
depends v e r y much o n t h e l e v e l o f
effort,
access
to
compu t e r
installations,
a v a i l a b i l i t y o f data
A
maagement
experts,
etc.
plan-specific
consciousness
should
e x i s t a t a l l times i n developing a
u s a b l e d a t a i n f o r m a t i o n system t h a t
will
s u i t m o s t a d e q u a t e l y t h e needs
o f t h e water
resources planner
in
the specific context.
Sometimes t h e
p l a n i n v o l v e s a v e r y l a r g e amount o f
d a t a , and t h e t a s k o f d a t a h a n d l i n g ,
compiling analytical
results,
and
converting
them
to
fit
plan
r e q u i r e m e n t s c a n n o t be coped w i t h by
c o n v e n t i o n a l methods.
Evaluation o f
t h e d a t a c o l l e c t e d may a l s o b e a
d e a l i ng
with
p r o b 1 em
conventionally tabulated values
in
high
numbers
means
always
an
u n j u s t i f i e d e x p e n d i t u r e i n terms o f
c o s t , a c c u r a c y , and t i m e .
I n such
cases,
t h e d a t a can o n l y be handled
w i t h the aid of
computer
data

processing,
and t h e need f o r
a
p l a n - s p e c i f i c d a t a base o r d a t a - b a s e
s y s t e m may even a r i s e .
The
term
data
base
was
introduced
into
the theory
and
p r a c t i c e o f d a t a management b y t h e
end
of
t h e 60s.
A d a t a base
connotes a c o l l e c t i o n o f v a r i o u s
fSles,
including
types of data
r e l a t i o n s among t h e s e f i l e s , d a t a
B u t , as
a g g r e g a t e s , and d a t a i t e m s .
happens o f t e n t o a f a s h i o n a b l e t e r m ,
many o r g a n i z a t i o n s s t a r t e d c a l l i n g
their
f i l e s d a t a bases,
changing
only
t h e name w i t h o u t g i v i n g n o t i c e
to
such
fundamental
data-base
properties
as e x c l u s i o n o f d a t a
redundancy,
provision
for
data
independence and p r o t e c t i o n , p r e c i s e
d e f i n i t i o n o f m u t u a l r e l a t i o n s among
d i f f e r e n t data,
and p r o v i s i o n o f
real-time
access t o s t o r e d d a t a .
The i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e s e p r o p e r t i e s
has
grown c o n s i d e r a b l y w i t h t h e
development o f b e t t e r
software
for
d a t a p r o c e s s i n g and management.
Data-base systems a r e sometimes
c a l l e d d a t a banks;
they
include
several
data
bases
stored
on
peripheral
storage
devices
and
c o l l e c t i o n s o f computer programs f o r
such
typical
data
processing
operations
as
data
search,
retrieval,
updating,
input,
and
( 0r
del e t ion.
In
addition
alternatively),
the
system
may
include on-line
u s e r s who i n t e r a c t
with
data
bases
from
remote
terminals.

3.7

References

Andr e j anov,
V.G.
1975.
M e t e o r o l o g i c a l and H y d r o l o g i c a l
Data R e q u i r e d i n P l a n n i n g t h e
Development o f Water R e s o u r c e s .
Operational
Hydrology
Report
No.5, WMO No. 419, WMO, Geneva.
Avery, E .
1977. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f
Photographs,
3 r d ed.
Aer i a1
Co.,
Burgess
Publishing
Minneapolis.
Johnston,
J.
1972.
Econometric
Methods.
M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

K i n d l e r , J., and C . S .
Russell,
in
Bower,
c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h B.T.
I.
Gouevsky,
D.R.
Maidment,
R.W.T.
Sewel 1
(eds.)
and
1984. Mode 1 i n g Water Demands.
Academic p r e s s , London.

WHO

Wor I d
Meteorological
1972.
Casebook
Organization,
on H y d r o l o g i c a l
Network D e s i g n
Practice,
WHO No.
324. WHO,
Geneva.

WHO

Wor I d
Meteorological
Organization.
1974.
Guide 'to
H y d r o l o g i c a l P r a c t i c e s , 3 r d ed.,
168. WHO, Geneva.
WHO No.

Unesco/WMO.
1981. W a t e r R e s o u r c e s
Assessment A c t i v i t i e s , Handbook
f o r National Evaluation (Draft),
Paris.

U.S.

OTA
- U.S.
Office
of
1982.
Technology
Assessment.
Use
of
Models
for
Water
R e s o u r c e s Management,
Planning
and P o l i c y .
OTA,
Washington,
D.C.

W a t t , W.E.,
and K.C.
Wilson.
1973.
An
economic
approach
for
e v a 1 u a t i ng
the
adequacy
of
hydrologic data.
I n Proceedings
of
the
Second
International
in
Hydrology,
Sympos i um
Water R e s o u r c e s
September 1972.
Publications,
Fort
Col 1 i n s ,
Colorado.

Yevjevich,
V.
1973
Open i ng
remarks.
In
Decisions w i t h
Inadequate
Hydrologic
Data.
Proceedings
of
the
Second
in
International
Sympos i u m
Hydrology,
S ep t embe r
1972.
Water
Resources
Publications,
F o r t C o l l i n s , Colorado.

4. Formulation and screening o f project alternatives

T h i s chapter i s concerned w i t h
t h e f o r m u l a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g o f
p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s : these u s u a l l y
c o n s t i t u t e the t h i r d stage
i n the
water
resources planning process.
This
stage
i nc 1 udes
the
classification
of
project
alternatives,
the actual generation
of
project alternatives,
checking
t h a t these a l t e r n a t i v e plans are
compatible
with
other
plans,
checking t h a t
t h e models u s e d a r e
c a l i b r a t e d and c r e d i b l e ,
and u s i n g
hierarchical
and
multiobjective
analysis
t o screen
the
various
project alternatives.
T h i s stage
leads t o t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f s e l e c t e d
alternative
p r o j e c t s and t o t h e
evaluation
of
their
r e 1 a t iv e
a d v a n t a g e s and d i s a d v a n t a g e s .

4.1 Overview of the evaluation

of alternatives stage
The p l a n n i n g and management o f
water
r e s o u r c e s and w a t e r - r e l a t e d
l a n d r e s o u r c e s i s b o t h a n a r t and a
s c i e n c e , and i t i n v o l v e s t h e u t m o s t
u t i l i z a t i o n o f many d i s c i p l i n e s .
In
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , f o r e c a s t s and
p r e d i c t i o n s m u s t b e made u n d e r
risk
and
uncertainty.
In
addition,
decision-makers
must a n a l y z e t h e
various alternative policies that
o f t e n r e f l e c t c o n f l i c t i n g economic,
societal,
environmental,
and
p o l i t i c a l forces.
A water resources
p l a n has a v i a b l e chance o f b e i n g
i f i t addresses
implemented o n l y
i t s e l f t o the m u l t i p l e objectives
and g o a l s o f t h e r e g i o n c o n c e r n e d .
With
ever-increasing
pub1 i c
awareness o f
and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n
the decision-making
process
(as
evidenced
b y t h e many c i t i z e n s '
advisory
boards,
active
public
hearings, e t c . ) , t h e planning task
ha,s
become
even
harder.
C o n s e q u e n t l y , methods and a p p r o a c h e s
from system a n a l y s i s ,
particularly
those t h a t a r e designed t o h e l p
decision-makers
choose
among

a l t e r n a t i v e s , have been i n c r e a s i n g l y
u s e d i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and
management.
When S t a g e 1,
plan i n i t i a t i o n
p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g , and S t a g e
2 , d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and p r o c e s s i n g ,
have been completed, a p l a n i s r e a d y
for
S t a g e 3, w h i c h encompasses t h e
f o r m u l a t i o n and s c r e e n i n g o f p r o j e c t
alternatives.
In
this
stage,
several
s t e p s must be f o l l o w e d .
These i n c l u d e
and

a)

the verbal
articulation
quantification of

and

o b j e c t iv e s
constraints--hydrological,
institutional,
financial,
etc.
measures--structural
nonstructural
the
s y s tem s
components (e.g.
and s u b a r e a s ) .
the
system's
demands :

and

( r e g i o n s)
subbasins

projected

m u n i c i p a l and/or
domestic
industrial
agr i c u l t u r a l
fish
and/or
wildlife
hab i t a t

the
system's
projected
supply c a p a b i l i t i e s :

groundwater
s u r f a c e water
i n t e r b a s i n water
transfer
reclaimed water
etc.

w a t e r q u a l i t y p r o b l e m s and/
or p o t e n t i a l contaminations

f l o o d problems and/or
for flood protection

*
*

h yd r o-power

J(

etc.

*
J:

based

on

of

the

risk-benefit

conduct o f impact analyses

on t h e a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s

When p l a n a l t e r n a t i v e s s u i t a b l e
for
potential
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n have
b e e n s e l e c t e d , t h i s marks t h e end o f
the p r e f e a s i b i l i t y part
of
the
study.
Toward
t h e end o f S t a g e 3,
t h e p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s has t o t a k e
over.
In particular, the following
s t e p s s h o u l d be taken:

J(

The f i n a l
result
process i s t h e p o l i t i c a l
continue or discontinue
activity.
If
t h e dec
proceed, t h e n e x t s t e p s
J(

evaluation
of
a l t e r n a t i v e plans

When S t a g e 3 - - t h e
formulation
and s c r e e n i n g o f a l t e r n a t i v e s - - h a s
b e e n c o m p l e t e d , i t must b e d e c i d e d
if
more
data
a r e needed.
If
possible,
decisions
on
specific
m o d e l s s h o u l d b e p o s t p o n e d u n t i l any
needed a d d i t i o n a l d a t a a r e a c q u i r e d
or until a
data
base
becomes
available.

evaluation
of
the
decision-makers'
preferences,
with
appropriate
response
by
to
mak i ng modi f i c a t i o n (s)
the plan

the

generation
of
severa 1
alternative
plans
with
Pareto optimal
solutions
(i.e.,
a s o l u t i o n w h e r e one
o b j e c t iv e c a n b e i mproved
only a t
t h e expense
of
degrad i ng
another
and
their
o b j e c t i ve)
respective trade-offs

conduct
ana 1 y s e s

multiobjective

discussion o f the r e s u l t s
w i t h decision-makers a t the
1 eve 1 s,
as
v a r i ous
appropriate

recreation

b) c o n c e p t a n a l y s i s
f o l l o w i n g steps:

conduct o f
analysis

needs

conduct
of
pub1 i c
hearings,
as a p p r o p r i a t e ,
t o generate support f o r the
plan
b y t h e p u b l i c and
other
important
c o n s t i t u e n c i es
e v a l u a t i o n o f comments and
s u g g e s t i o n s made b y
the
p u b l i c and t h e a g e n c i e s

*
*
4.2
e

of
this
decision t o
he p l a n n i n g
sion
is to
nc 1 ude

a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o complete
t h e p l a n n i n g process
appropriation
of
funds
( c o u l d b e t h e same as
the
authorization,
in
some
c o u n t r i es)
designation o f
an agency
( o r agenc i es)
t o comp 1 e t e
t h e p 1 ann i n g p r o c e s s
formation o f a
regional
(as
planning
e n t it y
a p p r o p r ia t e )

Classification of
alternatives

I n t h e p l a n n i n g process,
all
a 1 t e r n a t iv e s
p l aus ib 1 e
project
s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d - - f e a s i b l e and
nonfeasible,
struct u r a 1
and
nonstructural,
water
and
A I t h o u g h some may v i e w
"non-water
the
study
of
n o n f e a s ib l e
a l t e r n a t i v e s as w a s t e f u l ,
important
and v a l u a b l e
i n f o r m a t i o n m i g h t be
gained from
such
effort:
for
example,
a s e n s i b l e measure o r p l a n
t h a t happens t o b e a t t h e t i m e
politically
or
institutionally
i n f e a s i b l e c a n shed
l i g h t on t h e
cost
associated
with
existing
i n s t i t u t i o n a l impediments and m i g h t
i n d i c a t e s p e c i f i c ways f o r r e m o v i n g
or
alleviating
such
obstacles.
Non-wa t e r
alternatives
o f ten
c o n s t i t u t e an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f what

."

-43-

is
commonly
known
as a w a t e r
a l t e r n a t i v e package:
for
example,
land
transportation
might
be
considered
as an a l t e r n a t i v e t o
navigation.
Technical
constraints
may a l s o i n d i c a t e t h e s e l e c t i o n o f
a dam
alternatives:
for
example,
s i t e m i g h t have a n e x c e l l e n t r o c k
f o u n d a t i o n b u t would r e q u i r e major
work
in
relocating
people
or
transportation
1 i nes,
r e r o u t i ng
w h i l e another l o c a t i o n might r e q u i r e
e x t e n s i v e f o u n d a t i o n work.
Furthermore,
it
must
be
realized
that
there
are often
d i f f e r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e s t o accomplish
For example,
t h e same o b j e c t i v e .
f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n c a n be a c h i e v e d b y
retention
structures,
by
flood
levees,
o r by z o n i n g t o p r e v e n t
settlements
i n flood-prone
areas.
On t h e o t h e r hand, a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r
water
supply
i n c l u d e t h e use o f
g r o u n d or
s u r f a c e w a t e r or b o t h
Also,
storage
(conjunctive use).
f o r a w a t e r s u p p l y may p o s s i b l y b e
p r o v i d e d e i t h e r b e h i n d a l a r g e dam
i n t h e m a i n r i v e r o r b e h i n d many
smaller
dams
located
in
the
tributaries.
Hydro-power g e n e r a t i o n
should
be
considered
within a
b r o a d e r economic s c a l e , w i t h n u c l e a r
or f o s s i l - f i r e
generating
units
c o n s i d e r e d as p a r t o f t h e system.
Such c o n s i d e r a t i o n s commonly l e a d t o
t h e use of
pumped s t o r a g e p l a n t s ,
energy
d u r i ng
where
excess
l o w - c o n s u m p t i o n p e r ods i s u s e d t o
pump w a t e r i n t o a emporary s t o r a g e
rom w h i c h i t
is
a t high elevation,
released
through
turbines
at
peak-demand h o u r s .
Although a c a s s i f i c a t i o n o f
a l t e r n a t i v e s can be h e l p f u l
for
pedagogical
purposes,
the planner
should
be
careful
to
avoid
simplistic
dichotomies
in
c 1 ass i f y i ng
alternatives--for
instance,
water
vs.
non-wa t e r
a1 t e r n a t i v e s - - o r
similar
simpleminded
classifications
of
water i s s u e s ,
s u c h as g r o u n d v s .
surface water,
water q u a n t i t y vs.
q u a l i t y , water supply vs.
demand,
etc.
The
successful
operation,
m a i n t e n a n c e , and management o f
any
water
resources
system
should
u t l i m a t e l y rranscend the b a r r i e r s

created
by
these
artificial
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and make u s e o f
the
attributes of
all
p l a n components
and t h e s y s t e m ' s p o t e n t i a l s .

4.3 Generation of alternatives

D u r i n g Stage 3 o f t h e p l a n n i n g
process--the
formulation
and
of
project
s c r e e n i ng
alternatives--several
possibilities
exist
i n terms of
g e n e r a t i o n and
screening o f
alternatives.
These
include the following.
(i)

A s m a l l number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s
leads
t o elimination of
the
screening step.

( i i ) A l a r g e number o f
alternatives
the
use
of
necess i t a t e s
mathematical
models
(this
is
o f t e n t h e case f o r
long-range
and r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g ) .
( i i i ) A l a r g e number o f
alternatives
r e q u i r e s t h e use o f h i e r a r c h i c a l
screening
i n stages,
w i t h an
increasing r i g i d i t y o f selection
and/or
exclusion c r i t e r i a being
a d o p t e d as t h e s c r e e n i n g p r o c e s s
proceeds.
This procedure a l s o
requires
that
planning
p h i l o s o p h i e s b e a g r e e d upon b y
a l l concerned p a r t i e s .
I t should be c l e a r l y noted t h a t
S t a g e 3 and S t a g e 4 ( d e v e l o p m e n t o f
final
study
results)
are
not
mutually exclusive,
and o f t e n some
overlapping occurs.
In particular,
t h e d i s c u s s i o n and a r g u m e n t s t h a t
t a k e p l a c e i n Stage 3 should be
recorded so t h a t a c t i v i t i e s a t Stage
4 c a n be a p p r o p r i a t e y g u i d e d . T h i s
i s e v e n more c r i t i c a l i f a new team
works on Stage 4.
The p l a n n e r who i s engaged
in
the
process
of
generating
projects
may
a 1 t e r n a t iv e
d i f f e r e n t i a t e between cases w i t h a
r e l a t i v e l y modest number o f d i s c r e t e
a l t e r n a t i v e s and t h o s e w i t h a v e r y
1arge
(inf init e
and
c o n t i nuous)
In the
number
of
alternatives.
f o r m e r case,
the alternatives are
p r i m a r i l y generated d i r e c t l y through
b r a i n s t o r m i n g and by p e r t u r b a t i o n o f
In
the
previous
alternatives.

l a t t e r - - t h e c o n t i n u o u s c a s e - - t h e use
o f m o d e l s i s a l m o s t i m p e r a t i v e , and
t h e r o l e o f t h e a n a l y s t and/or
the
p l a n n e r and t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r i s t o
decide
which
of
the
system's
objectives
s h o u l d be k e p t as s u c h
and w h i c h s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a s
constraints.

model
c r e d i b i l i t y needs t o be d e a l t
the planning
w i t h i n a l l stages o f
process.
P r o b a b l y t h e b e s t way i s
t o have an open d i s c u s s i o n a b o u t t h e
model t o be used b o t h w i t h t h e
with
the
decision-makers
and
a f f e c t e d p a r t i e s i n t h e e a r l y stages
o f model s e l e c t i o n .

The u s e o f m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l s
i n the generation o f alternative
p:ans i s m o s t i m p o r t a n t and v a l u a b l e
when t r a d e - o f f s a r e c o n s i d e r e d .
The
h i e r a r c h i c a l approach, w h i c h a l l o w s
the aggregation o f
s e v e r a l models
i n t o an o v e r a l l model, c a n b e v e r y
h e l p f u l here.
For example,
linear
programming a l l o c a t i o n models can be
i n t e g r a t e d w i t h dynamic programming
capacity--expansion
models,
and
further
i n t e g r a t i o n can t a k e p l a c e
w i t h s t r e a m f l o w s i m u l a t i o n models,
etc.--all
within
a hierarchical
m u l t i o b j e c t i v e framework.

A c c o r d i n g t o t h e OTA
study
(U.S.
OTA 19821, t h e l a c k o f model
c r e d i b i l i t y c o n s t . i t u t e s one o f
the
m o s t common r e a s o n s f o r t h e l a c k o f
u s e o f models b y d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and
other policy analysts.

4.4 M o d e l c r e d i b i l i t y a n d m o d e l
calibration
Model
c r e d i b i l i t y and
model
calibration
i m p l y two d i f f e r e n t b u t
r e l a t e d issues.
The c r e d i b i l i t y o f
a model r e f e r s t o t h e a c c e p t a n c e o f
t h e model, w h i l e model
calibration
connotes
estimation
of
model
parameters.
Models always
represent
an
a b s t r a c t i o n o f those features o f the
real
world
t h a t a r e considered
r e l e v a n t b y t h e model b u i l d e r .
They
t h e r e f o r e a r e o n l y as good as t h e
perception
of
their
creators.
Because o f
this,
they are,
and
s h o u l d be,
o n l y one p a r t o f t h e
d e c i s i o n process.
The a c c e p t a n c e o f
a l l o r p a r t o f t h e model c o n c l u s i o n s
must be l e f t t o t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f
the
responsible
engineer.
The
engineer
s h o u l d make a l l e f f o r t s t o
v a l i d a t e o r v e r i f y t h e models.
Many
approaches
and
d if f erent
philosophies e x i s t
(e.g.,
how t o
v e r i f y m o d e l s employed f o r l o n g - t e r m
p r e d i c t i o n f o r future-use l e v e l s ) .
There i s a l s o t h e q u e s t i o n o f
overall
model
acceptance--model
credibility
i n t h e eyes o f
the
decision-makers,
their
staff,
the
general p u b l i c , e t c .
The p r o b l e m o f

There a r e many e l e m e n t s
that
contribute t o the c r e d i b i l i t y level
o f any i n d i v i d u a l model (see Haimes
19811, i n c l u d i n g ( i ) t h e scope o f
t h e model, ( i i ) i t s s t r u c t u r e , ( i i i )
i t s m o d u l a r i t y aspects,
(iv)
the
it
number
of
objectives
that
e v a l u a t e s , (v) t h e a c c e p t a b i 1 i t y and
r o b u s t n e s s o f t h e assumptions
made
( b o t h i m p l i c i t l y and e x p l i c i t l y ) ,
(vi)
t h e q u a l i t y o f i t s d a t a base,
(vii)
the sophistication o f
the
o p t i m i z a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s used, ( v i i i )
the
capability of
t h e computers
of
the
used,
(ix)
the quality
interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary
setup of
t h e group t h a t developed
t h e model, (x) t h e l e v e l o f model
validation,
(xi)
the
model's
v e r i f i c a t i o n and t e s t i n g , and
(xii)
the
level
of
the
risk
and
u n c e r t a i n t y elements.
In
short,
the
needs
and
i m p o r t a n c e o f model c r e d i b i l i t y
in
a1 1
aspects
and phases o f
the
process
cannot
be
p 1 ann i ng
overemphasized.
Model c a l i b r a t i o n ,
as d e f i n e d
earlier,
i s a prerequisite for the
models
in
use o f . mathematical
systems a n a l y s i s .
The c a l i b r a t i o n
o f a model i m p l i e s a commitment
of
time
and
financial
resources.
T h e r e f o r e , models m u s t b e a d j u s t e d
and/or
a d a p t e d t o t h e d e g r e e of
accuracy r e q u i r e d a t t h e stage i n
q u e s t i on.
The u s e o f m o r e - s o p h i s t i c a t e d
m o d e l s may b e o f
great help
in
c a l i b r a t i n g t h e s i m p l i f i e d and l e s s
e x p e n s i v e models t h a t can be used

-45-

with
higher
efficiency
for
A good and
p r e l i m i n a r y screening.
proper
c a l i b r a t i o n o f mathematical
models may e n c o u r a g e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
t o u s e them as a h e l p f u l t o o l .
Models s h o u l d n o t
only
be
calibrated,
they
also
must b e
indepently v e r i f i e d .
Often modelers
tend t o use a l l t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n i n
t h e c a l i b r a t i o n phase and have n o o r
l i t t l e reserved information f o r the
v e r i f i c a t i o n phase.

4.5 Interaction between analyst

and decision -maker
The f o l l o w i n g t h r e e g r o u p s c a n
be i d e n t i f i e d r e l e v a n t t o t h i s s t a g e
o f the p l a n n i n g process:
i)

the planners

ii)

the
systems
analyst,
who
provides technical
support t o
the planners,

iii)

the policy-makers
participants

and

public

Given t h a t
t h e p l a n n e r s have
s e v e r a l o b j e c t i v e s on t h e i r p l a n n i n g
agenda
( s u c h as w a t e r s u p p l y , f l o o d
c o n t r o l , water q u a l i t y , r e c r e a t i o n ) ,
t h e p l a n n e r s may a t
the
first
i n t e r a t i o n develop a f i r s t - c u t plan
or
five
or o p t i o n o f about four
alternative
plans.
The a n a l y s t s
t h e n use mathematical
models t h a t
incorporate the various input-output
relationships,
. objectives,
and
constraints
to
cast
these
a l t e r n a t i v e plans i n a q u a n t i t i a t i v e
form
In
particular,
when
m u l t i o b j e c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i o n models
and m e t h o d o l o g i e s a r e u s e d ,
then
Pareto optimal
s o l u t i o n s and t h e i r
corresponding t r a d e - o f f s
are also
generated--all associated w i t h the
i n i t i a l f i r s t - c u t p l a n s generated by
the
planners.
The
planners
reevaluate t h e i r
original
four o r
f i v e a l t e r n a t i v e s and m o d i f y them a s
appropriate, using the q u a n t i t a t i v e
information
generated
by
the
The
surrogate
worth
analysts
t r a d e - o f f method, f o r
example,
can
t h e n b e used h e r e i n a s i m u l a t i o n
mode.
Following several
iterations
among
the
planners
and
the

analyst(s),
the
four
or
five
a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s a r e ready
for
evaluation
b y t h e p u b l i c and/or
p o l i c y a n a l y s t s and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s .
The a n a l y s t ,
when c o n s u l t i n g
with
such
decision-makers
as
p o l i i c i a n s and s e n i o r b u r e a u c r a t s ,
m u s t b e aware t h a t t h e y may t r y
at
t h i s stage t o exclude a l t e r n a t i v e s
t h a t compete w i t h t h o s e
that
they
f avo
Decision-makers
are
comm s s i o n e d , e l e c t e d , a p p o i n t e d , o r
i n some
other
way
given
the
a u t h o r i t y and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o make
d e c i s i o n s , and t h e r e f o r e t h e a n a l y s t
should
not
play
that
role.
Decision-makers
can a l s o
identify
pol it i c a l
and
institutional
c o n s t r a i n t s t h a t w o u l d e x c l u d e some
alternatives.
The m a i n
outlines
must be p r e s e n t e d t o p o l i t i c i a n s ,
b u r e a u c r a t s , and a f f e c t e d a g e n c i e s
e a r l y enough and t h o r o u g h l y enough
that
they w i l l
n o t be taken by
s u r p r i se
and
react,perhaps
automatically,
by
completely
r e j e c t i n g t h e p l a n (which f o r
them
is
the easiest
way
to react).
T h o r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n s w i l l h e l p make
them amenable t o a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e
p l a n and t o
i d e n t i f y i n g themselves
w i t h i t , so t h a t t h e y may u l t i m a t e l y
become i t s a d v o c a t e s .
I n screening a l t e r n a t i v e s ,
the
planners
should
simultaneously
represent
four possibly c o n f l i c t i n g
i n t e r e s t s , v i e w s and p e r s p e c t i v e s :
i)

t h e i r agency
o r i e n t a t i ons)

ii)

the
public
manifested
participation

(its

mission

and

at
large
as
through
pub1 i c

i i i ) t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l judgment
iv)

t h e o v e r a l l g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s
o f the o r i g i n a l planning study

These
four
overlapping
p e r s p e c t i v e s may n o t n e c e s s a r i l y b e
compatible--they are o f t e n not.
One
o f the planners'
objectives
should
be
the
development
and/or
f o r m u l a t i o n o f a f i n a l p l a n t h a t can
enhance t h e s o c i a l w e l l - b e i n g o f t h e
p e o p l e i n t h e r e g i o n , can u l t i m a t e l y

-46-

b e a c c e p t e d b y t h e p u b l i c and o t h e r
p o l i c y o r d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s , and can
a l s o be
implementable.
In
the
screening process,
this objective
should guide t h e planners toward a
compromise p l a n o r s o l u t i o n t h a t
is
v i a b l e and t h a t has a r e a s o n a b l e
chance o f a c c e p t a n c e ; o t h e r w i s e , t h e
p l a n n i n g e f f o r t w o u l d be o n l y an
e x e r c i se.

output.
There a r e
for this:

several

reasons

1) C o o p e r a t i o n may n o t b e c o n s i d e r e d
i m p o r t a n t by a l l of t h e agencies

2) Too o f t e n a p e r s o n w i t h o u t much
responsibility or
authority is
sent t o t h e meetings.

3) N o t a l l
Inherent
in
multiobjective
methodologies
is
o p t i m i z a t i on
i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e decision-makers
and t h e s o l i c i t a t i o n o f t h e i r i n p u t s
and p r e f e r e n c e s .
I n the
haumee
R i v e r B a s i n Case S t u d y
(see Case
Study
41,
for
example,
this
i n t e r a c t io n
took
p l ace numerous
times.
The n o t i o n t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s
a s i n g l e decision-maker
i n public
projects
is,
of
c o u r s e , n a i v e and
unrealistic.
I n t h e Maumee S t u d y ,
there
was
continuous
and c l o s e
i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e a n a l y s t s and
the
decision-makers
at
various
levels
of
the
decision-making
hierarchy.
Each o f t h e s e l e v e l s had
i t s own i n f l u e n c e and i m p a c t o n t h e
s t u d y outcome.
Very o f t e n ,
the
a n l a y s t s were t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
themselves.
The
h ie r a r c h y
of
the
d e c i s i o n makers c o n s i s t e d o f
P 1 ann i ng B o a r d members and t h e i r
close associates,
who
in
turn
centralized
t h e d a t a and p r o v i d e d
t h e needed t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n t o
t h e P l a n n i n g Board.
I n addition,
t h i s hierarchy
included the study
manager
and
his
staff,
plus
associates a t the executive level o f
t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission,
t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission
itself,
the
Citizens'
Advisory
Committee,
t h e Study committee, t h e
Steering
Commi t t e e ,
the
Water
the
pub 1 i c
Resources
Counc i 1 ,
t h r o u g h v a r i o u s p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , and
other
agencies
who
were
not
r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e above g r o u p s o f
decision-makers
but
who
have
influence i n the region.

4.6

Compatibility with other

plans and public participation

Even t h o u g h c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h
agencies d u r i n g the p l a n n i n g process
will
not
is
essential,
this
necessarily
lead t o a coordinated

meetings a r e attended,
and r e p o r t s a r e n o t c o n s i d e r e d
seriously.

4) T h e r e may b e b a s i c d i s a g r e e m e n t s
among t h e a g e n c i e s .
Nevertheless, i t
is
important
t h a t a water p l a n n o t be negated by
t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f another
agency's
project,
e.g.,
building a reservoir
on t h e s i t e o f a major
highway
(or
v i c e v e r s a ) ; a planned a g r i c u l t u r a l
a
expansion
being
flooded
by
reservoir; o r having water q u a l i t y
improvement k i l l e d o f f b y a n o t h e r
country's diversion o f flows.
Thus,
b e f o r e t h e f i n a l p l a n i s developed,
i t i s important t h a t appropriate
o f f ic i a 1 s
(decision-makers)
be
i n v o l v e d - - t h o s e who c a n a g r e e t o
modifications
and w i l l e n s u r e t h a t
t h e y a r e done.
One s h o u l d t r y
to
incorporate
at
l e a s t some o f t h e c o m p a t i b i l i t y
c o n d i t i o n s among p l a n n e d a c t i v i t i e s
constraints
i n the
as
expl i c i t
a n a l y s i s - - i f t h e y a r e indeed b i n d i n g
constraints.
I t i s more e f f i c i e n t
t o consider t h e c o m p a t i b i l i t y issues
at
the
o u t s e t t h a n j u s t as a
post-analysis matter.
In c e r t a i n countries,
public
h e a r i n g s and p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n
a r e r e q u i r e d b y law p r i o r t o f i n a l
of
any
major
water
approva 1
resources p r o j e c t
that
involves
p u b l i c funds.
These p u b l i c h e a r i n g s
have
a g r e a t advantage i n t h a t
p u b l i c concerns,
objections,
and
the
views
other
t h a n t h o s e of
i n t e r e s t e d agencies a r e heard,
and
o f t e n subsequent m o d i f i c a t i o n s a r e
incorporated i n these plans.
There
is
a
need t o s y s t e m a t i z e
this
participation--to
the
extent
possible--and integrate i t w i t h the
p l ann i ng
and
s c r e e n i ng
ent ir e

-47-

process.
The
d e v e 1 opment
(and
design) o f questionnaires
t h a t can
a r t i c u l a t e p u b l i c preferences i n a
c o g e n t way i s a l s o i m p o r t a n t .
Also,
the preliminary education o f
the
p u b l i c o n t h e i s s u e s a t s t a k e and
the preparatory
steps f o r
public
h e a r i n g s and e v a l u a t i o n o f
these
a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s s h o u l d be p l a n n e d
w e l l i n advance.

v)

Screening o f a l t e r n a t i v e plans
is
a
continuous
and
iterative
process.
The
techniques
and
procedures
used
for
screening
p u r p o s e s a r e c l o s e l y and
largely
dependent on

i)

the level o f planning

ii)

t h e stage i n t h e p l a n n i n g proces

such

'
By
means
of
optimization
methods
a
large
number
of
a l t e r n a t i v e s can b e e v a l u a t e d ,
but
this
can be a c h i e v e d o n l y a t t h e
expense o f a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f
a l l alternatives.
By c o n t r a s t ,
a
p u r e s i m u l a t i o n model may a l l o w f o r
a very detailed description, but
in
this
case o n l y a few a l t e r n a t i v e s
can b e i n v e s t i g a t e d .
Depending o n
the p r o j e c t
i n question, the r i g h t
system a n a l y s i s t o o l
should
be
selected.
I n a s i t u a t i o n w i t h a few
clear,
distinct
alternatives,
one
should probably n o t
implement an
optimization
model,
but
should
rather
c h o o s e a model b y w h i c h t h e
consequences o f each a l t e r n a t i v e c a n
be assessed i n g r e a t d e t a i l .
The
o p p o s i t e argument o f c o u r s e a p p l i e s
t o t h e s i t u a t i o n where a
large
number
o f more o r
l e s s dependent
decision
v a r i ab 1 es
must
be
considered.
(This represents an
s y s tems ana 1 y s i s
" o p t i ma 1 u s e o f
technique.)

4.7 Procedures a n d techniques

for screening alternatives
There a r e two p r i n c i p a l o p t i o n s
for
dealing w i t h
the
screening
problem.
I n one, a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e
screened v i a o p t i m i z a t i o n c a r r i e d
o u t o n t h e a g g r e g a t e d d a t a and t h e
simplified
system r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .
A p p l i c a t i o n o f l i n e a r programming as
a s c r e e n i n g d e v i c e i s a good example
o f the f i r s t option--no
a priori
identification
of
discrete
a l t e r n a t i v e s i s done.
I n t h e second
option,
a
set
of
p o t e n t ia 1
alternatives
i s somehow d e v e l o p e d
( o f t e n based s i m p l y on
experts'
recommendtions),
and t h e y a r e t h e n
e v a l u a t e d and r a n k e d a c c o r d i n g t o
some c r i t e r i a .
I n both options a
single c r i t e r i o n or a multitude of
criteria
may
be
employed.
Consequently,
single-criterion
or
multiple-criteria
t e c h n i q u e s may be
used.
A p p r o p r i a t e p r o c e d u r e s and
techniques include the scalar
and
vector
l i n e a r programming method,
t h e SWT method, t h e E l e c t r e method,
the
score
cards
method,
etc.
I n t e r a c t i v e man-machine
procedures
and d e c i s i o n s u p p o r t s y s t e m s a r e
becoming more and more u s e d f o r
s c r e e n i n g purposes.

the
need
for
using
q u a n t i t a t i v e procedures

Any s c r e e n i n g p r o c e d u r e a t a n y
s t a g e o f t h e p l a n n i n g phase r e q u i r e s
that
t h e f o l l o w i n g items be decided
upon b y consensus o f
the screening
team:
a)

a set of
decision variables
t o be
considered a t the g i v e n stage (these
become more s p e c i f i c and d e t a i l e d a s
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s advances f r o m
one s t a g e t o t h e n e x t )

b) a s e t o f
emp 1 o y e d

screening

The s c r e e n i n g team
stage t o stage.

criteria

may

vary

to

be

from

A g r o u p t e c h n i q u e (such as t h e
group
technique)
for
nom i na I
screening
alternatives
at
this
i n i t i a l l e v e l may b e recommended,
s i n c e p o l i t i c i a n s may a r g u e f o r a
long time without
result
i f the
arguments a r e n o t s t a t e d e x p l i c i t l y
i n w r i t i ng.

iii) the i t e r a t i o n w i t h i n the stage

iv)

the a v a i l a b i l i t y of qualified
and t r a i n e d p e r s o n n e l who can
make
use
of
quantitative
systemic approaches

S c r e e n i n g and g e n e r a t i o n may
o f t e n b e c o n s i d e r e d as a c o m p l e x ,
repeated a c t i v i t y ; i.e.,
a f t e r each
s c r e e n i n g t h e r e d u c e d number
of
alternatives
is
increased a g a i n by

allowing for
more d e t a i l
description of alternatives.

in

In
summary,
screening
techniques
may
range
anywhere
b e t w e e n " r u l e o f thumb" and " f o r m a l
o p t i m i z a t i o n , " depending on t h e t y p e
of problem
and
the
level
of
r a n k i ng
screening
at
wh i c h
procedures a r e used.

Use
of
hierarchical
analysis in plan formulation
and screening alternatives

4.8

decisions) :
dynamic
(time
dependent);
non-deterministic,
w i t h h i g h e l e m e n t s o f r i s k and
h a v i ng
uncertainties;
and
d i s t r i b u t e d parameters

the

A necessary c o n d i t i o n for
the
successful
use
of
systems
methodologies f o r water
resources
planning i s the a b i l i t y t o develop a
(mathemat i c a 1 )
model
that
is
r e s p o n s i v e t o (and a c c o u n t s f o r ) t h e
v a r i o u s o b j e c t i v e s , c o n s t r a i n t s , and
input-output casual r e l a t i o n s h i p s of
t h e system t h a t
i s b e i n g modeled.
Only i f t h i s c o n d i t i o n i s met w i l l
the
results
of
the
model b e
m e a n i n g f u l and i m p l e m e n t a b l e .
The
hierarchical
approach
p o s s e s s e s many i m p o r t a n t a t t r i b u t e s
f o r b o t h m o d e l i n g and o p t i m i z a t i o n .
The h i e r a r c h i c a l a p p r o a c h i s , i n t h e
f i r s t p l a c e , a p h i l o s o p h y and n o t a
r i g i d methodology.
This philosophy
recognizes t h a t
water
resources
s y s t e m s have most o f t h e f o l l o w i n g
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Haimes 1977) :

i)

multiple
noncommensurable
o b j e c t i v e s as w e l l
as m u l t i p l e
decision-makers

ii)

a l a r g e number o f v a r i a b l e s
parameters

v)

v a r i a b i l i t y of portions of
the
system
(problem), which g e t s i n
t h e way o f q u a n t i t a t i v e m o d e l i n g

Such c o m p l e x i t y s u g g e s t s
that
simple
systems methodologies
are
l i k e l y t o f a l l short of successfully
modeling
and
optimizing
water
r e s o u r c e s systems w i t h t h e above
characteristics.
The c o n c e p t o f t h e h i e r a r c h i c a l
approach
I S
based
on
the
decomposition of
large-scale
and
complex s y s t e m s and t h e s u b s e q u e n t
modeling
of
the
system
into
IIi n d e p e n d e n t "
subsystems.
This
d e c e n t r a l i z e d a p p r o a c h , by u t i l i z i n g
t h e concepts of l e v e l s , s t r a t a ,
and
layers,
e n a b l e s t h e systems a n a l y s t
to
assess
and
comprehend
the
behavior
of
t h e subsystems a t a
lower
level
and t o t r a n s m i t
the
information
obtained
to
fewer
subsystems a t a h i g h e r l e v e l .
I n applying the hierarchical
approach
to
the
modeling
and
optimization of
water
resources
systems,
combinations o f several
hierarchical
structures
are
available t o the analyst.
These
c o m b i n a t i o n s a r e based on f o u r m a j o r
descriptions
(decompos i t i o n s ) ,
name 1 y :

(1)

tempor a 1

and

( 2 ) phys i c a 1 - h y d r o l o g i c a l

i i i) a

large
number
of
components ( s u b s y s t e m s )

coupled

(3)

political-geographical

(4) g o a l - o r i e n t e d o r f u n c t i o n a l
iv)

input-output

causa 1
relationships that are nonlinear
(of ten
a
combination
of
continuous,
discrete,
and 0 - 1

(1) Temporal d e s c r i p t i o n

p.lanning

time

horizon

for

-49-

w a t e r s u p p l y p r o j e c t s o f t e n spans
30-50 y e a r s .
I n t o t h i s long-term
planning i s usually
imbedded
an
i n t e r m e d i a t e term o f
10-15 y e a r s ,
o f ten
r e f er r e d
to
as
planning-for-operation,
f o l l o w e d by
Clearly,
a s h o r t t e r m o f 2-5 y e a r s .
the
short-,
intermediate-,
and
1 ong- t e r m
p 1 ans
have
to
be.
c o m p a t i b l e w i t h e a c h o t h e r and t h u s
coordinated, since they r e l a t e t o
t h e same system.
To i l l u s t r a t e ,
p l a n n i n g h o r i z o n s o f water r e s o u r c e s
f o r c r o p and r e l a t e d l a n d u s e c a n b e
o f t h e o r d e r o f 1-2 y e a r s .
tiowever,
when a c r o p has been s e l e c t e d and
the water f o r
i t s seasonal
growth
has
been a l l o c a t e d ,
horizons o f
decisions with
respect
to
the
periodic
irrigation
within
the
season a r e o f t h e o r d e r o f weeks o r
days.
(2)
description

Physical-hydrological

A
river
bas i n
is,
by
a
hydrologically
definition,
self-contained
region,
separated
f r o m a d j a c e n t b a s i n s by r i d g e s o r
other topographical d i v i d e r s .
Often
a w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management s y s t e m
covers a r e g i o n c o n s i s t i n g o f a
complex o f
several
f i v e r basins.
Thus,
a r e g i o n c a n be d i v i d e d i n t o
several subregions, f u r t h e r
divided
into
several
r i v e r basins,
and
further
divided
into
several
subbasins.

(3)

Political-geographical

description
Regional
water
resources
systems o f t e n come under a v a r i e t y
o f geographically defined governing
agencies--city,
county,
and s t a t e ,
f o r instance.
Modeling f o r water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g and management
may
consider
a
political-geographical
des.cription
as a c r i t e r i o n f o r decomposing t h e
r e g i o n a l area i n t o subregions.

(4) G o a l - o r i e n t e d o r f u n c t i o n a l
description
Most w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s systems
have been a n a l y z e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o
t h e i r economic and f u n c t i o n a l g o a l s .
Var i ous
models
following
this

pattern
are
available
in
the
literature,
s u c h as
demand
and
supply
models
and
models
for
hydroelectric
power
generation,
i r r i g a t i o n , i n d u s t r i a l and m u n i c i p a l
use, r e c r e a t i o n , e t c .

4.9

Use
of
analysis

multiobjective

A recent trend
in
systems
a n a l y s i s has b e e n t o u s e m o d e l s t h a t
have
more
than
one
objective
is
especially
function.
This
important i n the planning o f
river
basins,
where t h e r e t e n d t o be
conf 1 i c t i n g
and
severa 1
noncommensurable
objectives.
for
example, o n e may w a n t t o m a x i m i z e
b o t h economic e f f i c i e n c y , w h i c h i s
measured
i n monetary u n i t s ,
and
environmental
quality,
which
is
measured
i n units
of
pollutant
concentration.
Traditionally, only
one o b j e c t i v e (economic e f f i c i e n c y )
has been c o n s i d e r e d , w i t h t h e o t h e r
objectives being included e i t h e r
as
constraints
or
as b e i n g somehow
commensurate
with
the
primary
o b j e c t iv e .
However,
society
is
p l a c i n g an i n c r e a s i n g i m p o r t a n c e o n
nonpecuniary
objectives
that
are
d i f f i c u l t t o quantify monetarily.
Adopting
a
multiobjective
analysis philosophy i n t h i s stage o f
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s (as w e l l a s
in
the
other
stages)
adds t o t h e
s y s t e m i c and q u a n t i t a t i v e
setup.
Cost-benefit
a n a l ys i s
has
t r a d i t i o n a l l y dominated b o t h Stage 3
and S t a g e 4.
I t can be e a s i l y
demons t r a t ed
that
cost-benefit
analysis
i s a special
case
(a
simp1 i f i e d case)
of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e
i n which
a n a l y s i s ; i t i s t h e case
a1 1
objectives
have
been
commensurated and augmented i n t e r m s
o f b e n e f i t s and c o s t s .
Fundamental
t o multiobjective
analysis
i s the Pareto
optimum,
which
is
also
known
as
the
so 1 u t i on.
noninferior
Qualitatively,
a
noninferior
s o l u t i o n o f a m u l t i o b j e c t i v e problem
i s one w h e r e any improvement of one
o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n can be achieved
o n l y a t t h e expense o f d e g r a d i n g
another.

-50-

Mathematical
modeling
and
systems e n g i n e e r i n g s h o u l d n o t be a
substitute for, but rather tools of,
the decision-making
process.
They
can be v e r y v a l u a b l e
i n generating
possible
outcomes
under c e r t a i n
c o n d i t i o n s and a s s u m p t i o n s .
They
are
capable
of
generating
a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s and p l a n s t h a t
under
spec i f i c
are
" o p t i ma 1 I '
assumptions
and
criteria.
In
m u l t i o b j e c t i v e planning,
where t h e
concept o f o p t i r n a l i t y
i s expanded
into
Pareto
optirnality,
the
generation o f
the various
model
Pareto
optimal
plans
can
be
invaluable i n identifying specific
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a t t r i b u t e s o f a
b a s i n ' s p l a n n i n g s u b a r e a as w e l l
as
in
quantifying
the
complex
i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s among t h e many
components i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s .
Once
the
limitations
of
the
mathematical
mode 1 s
under
consideration
are
i d e n t i f i e d and
q u a n t i f i e d , t h e y c a n b e used v e r y
e f f e c t i v e l y as s i m u l a t i o n models t o
answer "what
i f " type questions.
The e x p e r i e n c e g a i n e d u s i n g
the
surrogate
worth
trade-off
(SWT)
method r e i n f o r c e s
the
need
for
i n t e g r a t i n g m a t h e m a t i c a l models and
s i m u l a t i o n models t o i m p r o v e t h e
e f f i c a c y o f t h e p l a n n i n g process.
The a p p l i c a t i o n o f
the
SWT
method
t o v a r i o u s problems w i t h
multiobjective functions
can
be
extended
t o the minimization of
risk, sensitivity,
irreversibility,
and
uncertainty
associated w i t h
m a t h e m a t i c a l models j o i n t l y w i t h t h e
minimization
of
the
model's
objective
function,
in
a
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
framework.
The
Pareto optimal
s o l u t i o n s and - t h e
associated trade-off values help the
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s s e l e c t an a c c e p t a b l e
level
of
assurance
and
the
corresponding cost.
I n o t h e r words,
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s c a n make known t h e i r
preferences
w i t h respect t o the
1 eve 1
of
assurance
against
in
the
model I s
uncertainties
p r e d i c t i o n a t t h e expense o f
a
degradation
(reduction)
in
the
model's optimal solution.
The s u b j e c t o f
multiobjective
analysis
should
be
explicitly
d i s c u s s e d a t each s t e p
of
the

planning
p r o c e s s because o f
its
central
role in
water
resource
i f n o t a l l , water
planning.
Host,
r e s o u r c e s systems a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d
by
multiple objectives,
multiple
mu1 t ip l e
decision-makers,
and
constituencies.
I n f o r m u l a t i n g and
screening a l t e r n a t i v e plans,
these
m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e s , which a r e o f t e n
noncommensurable
and
may be i n
c o n f l i c t and i n c o m p e t i t i o n , m u s t be
given e x p l i c i t
and
quantitative
consideration
(to
the
extent
possible).
For example,
increasing
agricultural
production
commonly
leads t o a higher
l e v e l o f sheet
e r o s i o n and s e d i m e n t a t i o n ;
or
the
o p t i m a l use o f r e s e r v o i r s f o r f l o o d
c o n t r o l p u r p o s e s may b e a c h i e v e d a t
t h e expense o f r e d u c i n g hydro-power
g e n e r a t i o n (as a p p l i c a b l e ) , e t c .
-MulQob.jective
analysis i n t h i s
c o n t e x t s h o u l d b e v i e w e d n o t o n l y as
a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l a .p .p r o a c h b u t a l s o
as a p h i l o s o p h y .
Trade-offs a r e a
inherent p a r t of
neqotiation,
of
%chi
nq
consensus,
and
of
-compromise s o l u t i u .
Thus, t h e use
of
multiobjective
and t r a d e - o f f
a n a l y s i s i n t h e development o f f i n a l
p l a n r e s u l t s can be a n a t u r a l s t e p
i n t h i s phase.
This i s particularly
t r u e when t h e a n a l y s t s , p l a n n e r s ,
and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s a r e c o g n i z a n t o f
the
efficacy,
attributes,
and
limitations
of
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
analysis.

Numerous
methodologies
for
mu 1 t i o b j e c t i v e
optimization
(analysis)
have been d e v e l o p e d i n
t h e l a s t decade--many
of
them
in
conjunct ion
with
water
resource
p l a n n i n g and management.
Several
b o o k s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o d a y on t h e use
of multiple objectives
in
water
r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g and management.
The r o l e
of
multiobjective
analysis i s particularly c r i t i c a l i n
t h e addressing nonstructural plans,
i n which t h e cost,
benefits,
and
r i s k s cannot be e a s i l y q u a n t i f i e d i n
m o n e t a r y t e r m s as t h e y can i n more
structured plans.
Furthermore,
as
environmental
and
other
s o c i o e c o n o m i c a s p e c t s d o m i n a t e and
influence
policy
decisions,
the
importance
and
needs
of
m u l t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s become more

-51and more c r i t i c a l and e v i d e n t .

An
of
the
compl ex 1 y
examp 1 e
i n t e r r e l a t e d o b j e c t i v e s 3 a t must b e
dealt=
f o u n d i n t h e Maumee
- P l a n n i n g S t u d y - ( s e e Case S t u d y 4) ,
in
which
the
following
six
o b j e c t i v e s were
included
in
the
mathematical
model i n g
and
:enhancement
focusing
pollution

of
on

A
recent
development
of
multiobjective analysis
i s i t s use
i n a man-machine
i n t e r a c t i v e mode,
through .decision
support
syst=.Sf;'
(DSSs)
I n Israel, for
example,
a
n
D -S So e
fhas
- =
screening.
In
this
DSS,
all
are
s u b j ec t e d
to
e x a m i n a t i o n i n t e r m s o f 38 c r i t e r i a
t h a t h a v e an
overall
goal
of
a s s e s s i n g a minimum-damage f u n c t i o n
for
d e l a y i ng
a
project's
c o n s t r u c t i on.
Successful
experimentations
with
gam i ng
s i m u l a t i o n h a v e been r e a l i z e d ,
in
which p a r t o f
t h e s i m u l a t i o n of a
human
natural-resources
engineering-hardware
system
is
executed
"automatical l y "
by
computer,
while
t h e human p a r t i s
c a r r i e d o u t by people p l a y i n g r o l e s .
I t i s sometimes p o s s i b l e t o g e t
the
real-life
decision-makers
t o play
their
own r o l e s .
I n t h i s era of
i n c r e a s i ng
avai l a b i 1 it y
of
computers, a DSS m i g h t be a v e r y
promising concept t h a t c o u l d h e l p
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t o more c l e a r l y see
t h e consequences o f t h e i r s u b j e c t i v e
preferences.

water
quality,
poi nt-source

reduct ion
of
eros ion,
sedimentation,
and p h o s p h o r u s
from nonpoint sources
enhancement
of
opportunities

recreational

protection of w i l d l i f e habitat

%A&.r e d u c t i o n o f f l o o d damage
protection of agricultural

WCt0k;Lt

land

For
most
water
resources
systems
(and many o t h e r systems as
w e l l ) , d e c i s i o n s a r e n o t made b y a
single
individual
b u t r a t h e r by
groups o f i n d i v i d u a l s .
These may b e
l e g i s l a t i v e bodies,
the board o f
directors of
a water
district,
a
state o f f i c i a l , etc.
I n e v e r y case,
each member o f
t h e g r o u p has a
personal view o f t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e ,
i m p o r t a n c e , and r e l a t i v e v a l u e o f
the
various
objectives
being
considered.
F u r t hermor e,
each
decision-maker
may
have
a
c o n s t i t u e n c y t o whom he o r she i s
responsible.
T h i s means t h a t t h e
decision-maker
must
integrate the
relative
i n f l u e n c e and v i e w s o f t h e
segments o f t h i s c o n s t i t u e n c y
into
the evaluation o f the merits of the
alternatives.
The
critical
influence of
these decision-makers
and s t a k e h o l d e r s m u s t be r e c o g n i z e d
throughout t h e p l a n n i n g process.
I n t h i s handbook, a d i s t i n c t i o n
should
be
made
between
two
aspects-- ( i )
t h e needs, i m p o r t a n c e ,
and
efficacy
of
multiobjective
a n a l y s i s and ( i i ) t h e m e t h o d o l o g i e s
and
techniques of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e
analysis.
O b v i o u s l y our a t t e n t i o n
s h o u l d f o c u s on t h e f o r m e r , and n o t
on the l a t t e r .

To
s um
UP 9
real-world
dec i s i on-mak_i_n_.,Erpcesses-are,
,.
a 1 ways
associated
m u 1 t i o b i ec t i2-L
wi-th
-ms-..
The m o s t i m p o r t a n t t a s k s
of
a n a l y s t s who cope
with
the
c o n d u c t of m u l t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s
i s t o make t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s aware
t h a t they are a c t u a l l y doing t h a t
kind of
analysis,
implicitly,
in
t h e i r minds.
Thus, i t i s i m p o r t a n t
t o p u t some o r d e r i n t h e i r way o f
because a m a t h e m 2 i t i g l
t h i nk i ng,
;: ~model~ c a-n -n~e- v e~.
r be developed
to
~
~ . -~~
r
eP
a
c
e
Lh
e-deci
s
i
p
n
-mak_er'
s.way_o
i
, ---.
;
handling
m
u
l
t
i
..
o
. bj
e
..c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i o n
-:'
;rob1 ems. ,
.
I
-

~~

_^__.

----

--'--

4.10

References

Goicoechea,
A.,
D.
Hansen,
L.
Duckstein.
1982.
Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
Decisision
Analysis with
E n g i n e e r i n g and
Business A p p l i c a t i o n s .
Wiley,
New Y o r k .

&

-52-

Haimes,
Y.Y.
1977.
Hierarchical
Anal yses o f
Water
Resources
and
Systems:
Model i ng
Optimization
of
Large-scale
Systems.
M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k .

Y.Y.,
Hairnes,
(eds.)
Analysis
American
Engineers,

Y.Y.
1981.
Risk-benefit
Haimes,
analysis
in a
multiobjective
framework.
In
R i sk/Benef i t
Analysis
in
Water
Resources
Y.Y.
P l a n n i n g and Management,
Haimes, (ed.)
Plenum, New York
89-122.
and London, pp.

U.S.

D.J.

A 1 lee,
Multiobjective
i n Water R e s o u r c e s .
of
Civi 1
Society
New Y o r k .
and

1984.

OTA--U.S.
Office
of
Technology
Assessment.
1982.
Use
of
Models
for
Water
Resources Management,
Planning
and P o l i c y . OTA. Washington,D.C.

5. D e v e l o p m e n t o f final study results

I n S t a g e 4, t h e p l a n n i n g team,
following
extensive
discussion,
negotiation,
and p u b l i c h e a r i n g s ,
s e l e c t s a p l a n and recommends
its
adoption t o higher- level a u t h o r i t y .
These r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e made o n l y
a f t e r the completion of
S t a g e 3,
during
which
t h e team
(i)
has
s u c c e s s f u l l y conducted a f e a s i b i l i t y
study
t o evaluate the f i n a n c i a l ,
political,
legal-regulatory,
organizational,
and
personne 1
ramifications of
t h e proposed p l a n
and
its
impacts,
(i i)
has
identified,
quantified,
and
evaluated a l l p e r t i n e n t elements o f
r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
the
plan
as
part
of
the
eva 1 u a t i o n
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e t r a d e - o f f
and o p t i m i z a t i o n a c t i v i t y , and ( i i i )
has
developed
operational
rules
within a planning-for
-operation
study f o r
a1 1 p e r t i n e n t p r o j e c t ( s )
t h a t have been d e v e l o p e d as p a r t o f
the o v e r a l l plan.

5.1 The relationship

Stages 3 and 4

betwem

As m e n t i o n e d p r e v i o u s l y ,
there
e x i s t s a c e r t a i n o v e r l a p between
S t a g e s 3 and 4 o f
the p l a n n i n g
process.
I n a r e a l sense, t h e r e i s
a logical
c o n t i n u u m between
the
screening o f p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s
and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f f i n a l s t u d y
resul ts.

More s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e p r o c e s s
d e s i g n i ng,
and
of
p l ann i ng,
o p e r a t i n g water
resources p r o j e c t s
lends
itself
to
a
hierarchical
structure of
subsystems as w e l l as
decisions.
I t i s o f t e n common t h a t
higher-order
and
more
global
decisions d i c t a t e
and
influence
lower-level
and
more
local or
p a r o c h i a l d e c i s i o n s , and v i c e - v e r s a .
Yet, a t Stage 3 o f
the planning
process,
an a t t e m p t
i s made a t
executing
high-level
planning
or
without
a
detailed
design
planning-for-operation
a n a l ys i s .
Consequently,
the
p r e l i m i nary

made
s c r e e n i n g s a t Stage 3 a r e
without
the d e t a i l e d analyses t h a t
a r e commonly c o n d u c t e d a t S t a g e 4.
However,
from a p r a c t i c a l v i e w p o i n t
and g i v e n t h e l i m i t e d a v a i l a b l e t i m e
and r e s o u r c e s , t h e p r o p o s e d sequence
i s recommended
o f S t a g e s 3 and 4
here.
The p l a n n e r s h o u l d a l s o k e e p i n
m i n d t h a t S t a g e 4 may be d i r e c t l y
i n terms o f
c o u p l e d w i t h Stage 2
d a t a d e v e l o p m e n t and
improvement.
Furthermore, a t Stage 4 t h e p l a n n e r s
may f i n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o r e q u e s t a
p r o j e c t d e s i g n ( S t a g e 5) i n o r d e r t o
generate
more-accurate
cost
f u n c t i o n s of candidate s t r u c t u r e s o r
o t h e r measures
that
are
being
contemplated.
Note t h a t i n c e r t a i n
studies,
o n l y one p l a n
may
be
selected,
and a d e t a i l e d p r o j e c t
c o n f i g u r a t i o n would be a p p r o p r i a t e
f o r t h a t p l a n alone.
However, u n d e r
d i f f e r e n t circumstances,
more t h a n
one
plan
may
b e s e l e c t e d and
s u b s e q u e n t l y more t h a n one p r o j e c t
c o n f i g u r a t i o n would be i n o r d e r .
Stage
3
amounts
to
a
p r e l i m i n a r y s c r e e n i n g , w h i l e Stage 4
i s intended t o lead the p r o j e c t very
close
to
its final
recommended
c o n f i g u r a t i o n (or t h e e q u i v a l e n t
of
t h i s a t another l e v e l o f p l a n n i n g ) .
Because o f t h i s , S t a g e 4
is
likely
t o r e q u i r e t h e a l l o c a t i o n o f more
r e s o u r c e s and t h e u s e
of
more
s o p h i s t i c a t e d techniques,
and t h e
e n t i r e p r o c e s s i s l i k e l y t o b e more
thoroughly
executed.
Resu 1 t s
obtained
i n S t a g e 4 may s u g g e s t t h e
need f o r
a repetition
of
some
portions of
S t a g e 3 (an i t e r a t i v e
l o o p ) , w i t h perhaps
the generation
of
one
or
more
add i t i ona 1
alternatives.
is
D u r i n g S t a g e 4, t h e p r o j e c t
analyzed
in detail,
including the
g e n e r a t i o n o f one o r more s u i t a b l e
w i l l
integrated
models,
which
r e q u i r e the f o l l o w i n g steps:

-54-

a.

b.

quantitative definition
v a r i a b l e s and t e r m s

of

all

t h e s c r e e n ng r e s u l t s f r o m S t a g e
where a
l a r g e number o f
p o o r l y d e f ned a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s
were cons d e r e d
(The
term
p o o r l y de i n e d r e f e r s t o t h e
f u z z i ness f p r o j e c t dimensions,
u n c e r t a i n t y about
the time o f
commissioning,
and
vagueness
concerning
other
operational
p r o p e r t ies)

fr

3,

quantification
( t o the
possible) of a l l f i n a l

extent

C.

d.

e.

objectives
- constraints
- input-output
relationships
- m e a s u r e s - - s t r u c t u r a l and
nonstructural
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and e v a l u t i o n o f
a v a i l a b l e e x i s t i n g m o d e l s and
submodel s
that
might
be
c a n d i d a t e s f o r use i n Stage 4 o f
the planning process
evaluation of
the
data
base
needed f o r s t e p c above needed
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f new
submodel s

models

additional
endogenous
and
exogenous system d a t a , b u i l d i n g
on t h e d a t a t h a t were
just
sufficiently
detailed
and
accurate t o permit the screening
a t Stage 3 .

BJ

and

f.

integration of
newly developed
and
submodels
with
mode 1 s
e x i s t i n g models, as a p p r o p r i a t e

g.

g e n e r a t i o n o f needed p r o j e c t i o n s

h.

model t e s t i n g , c a l i b r a t i o n ,
v a l i d a t i o n , as a p p r o p r i a t e

and

The f i n a l
r e s u l t o f t h i s stage
presumably
leads- t o an " o p t i m a l "
plan,
better
known as t h e m o s t
preferred
or
the
least
compromised
plan.
The p l a n n i n g
and
pol icy
option
deve 1 oped
through
the
use
o f m o d e l s and
t h e i r associated
trade-offs
and
impacts
are
discussed i n d e t a i l
at this
stage.
This
i s done
with
the
participation
of
all
concerned
decision-makers,
stake-holders,
constituencies,
and a g e n c i e s .

5.2 input to and output from Stage 4

The e s s e n t i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s
that
t a k e p l a c e between S t a g e 4 and t h e
other
stages o f
the planning
process
will
be
summarized
in
t h i s section:

A p r o j e c t f e a s i b i l i t y study
is
a process t h a t s u b j e c t s the p r o j e c t
and i t s v a r i o u s components t o a s e t
of
pre-selected
qualifiction,
The
standards,
and
c r i t e r ia.
p r o j e c t and i t s components must
meet t h e s e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n o r d e r
t o b e d e s i g n a t e d as " f e a s i b l e . "
Such
standards
and
criteria
generally
i nc 1 ude
t e c h n i ca 1
economic,
legal-regulatory,
and
envi ronmental
aspects.
Project
f e a s i b i l i t y does n o t
include, i n
general, f i n a n c i a l , organizational,
or
institutional
feasibility.
Rather,
the
feasibility
study
provides the basis
upon
which
financial
arrangements
( e .g
funding
sources,
cost-sharing,
o r g a n i z a t i ona 1
bonds,
etc) ,
arrangements
(e g.,
h i r i ng
of
personnel,
administrative
structure,
levels
of
responsibilities,
etc.),
or
institutional
arrangements
(e.g.
agency r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , i n t e r a g e n c y
e t c .)
can
be
c o o r d i na t i on,
established
i n the future.
The
feasibility
study
should
also
include:

A ) Input to Stage 4
Stage
4 requires
the f o l l o w i n g inputs:

at

Output from Stage 4 needed

for feasibility study

least

identification of
a
selected
project--the
best
alternative
plan--and
setting
the
main
project
parameters t o j u s t i f y
and s u p p o r t t h e p r o j e c t .
generation

of

project

-55-

feasibility
statement.
The
of
feasibility--in"statement
c l u d i n g t e c h n i c a l , economic, and
environmental f e a s i b i l i t y - - o f t e n
does n o t
include
financial
f e a s i b i l i t y recommendations w i t h
regard t o organizational
and
institutional
aspects o f
the
project.

C)

Output from Stage 4 needed

project study , etc.).

for

The o u t p u t f r o m S t a g e 4 makes
possible the f i n a l
design o f t h e
project.
It
i nc 1 udes
the
specification
of
a l l parameters
needed f o r t h e d e s i g n , such as
the
q u a n t i t y o f w a t e r t o be r e l e a s e d ,
t h e demand as f u n c t i o n o f t i m e , and
the
location
and
s i zes
of
reservoirs,
canals,
c o n d u i t s , and
the l i k e .
The o u t p u t a l s o p r o v i d e s
i n f o r m a t i o n on o p e r a t i o n a l
rules
and u s u a l l y i d e n t i f i e s and a s s e s s e s
the
large-scale
impacts
a1 1
r e s u l t i n g from t h e p r o j e c t .
I t
does n o t e n t a i l a d e t a i l e d d e s i g n
of
the
required
structures,
a l t h o u g h t h e c o s t e s t i m a t e s and
t h e i r dimensions
s h o u l d b e known
roughly.
Therefore
the
output
i nc 1 udes:

*
*
*

f i n a l s p e c i f i c a t i o n of the
project
parameters
p r o p e r t i es
final
estimate
of
commissioning s t a t e

main
and

project

final
estimate
of
project
impacts (costs, b e n e f i t s , r i s k s ,
t r a d e - o f f s , e t c . ) i n c l u d i n g cash
f l o w and r e t u r n e s t i m a t e s

>k

recommendation f o r p r o j e c t

5.3

Sources,
quality
categories of Stage
needs

planners
continually
discover
d u r i n g l a t e r stages t h a t a d d i t i o n a l
information
i s needed and some
r e s p o n s i v e a c t i o n must b e t a k e n .
A t one e x t r e m e , a d a t a c o l l e c t i o n
p r o c e s s m i g h t be i n i t i a t e d a t
this
A t t h e o t h e r extreme, an
stage.
a r t i f i c i a l o r s y n t h e t i c d a t a base
might
be
generated from o t h e r
similar
sources
h a v i ng
characteristics
( r e g i ona 1 ,
s t r u c t u r a l , socioeconomic, e t c . ) .
I n g e n e r a l , d a t a a r e needed i n
more d e t a i l
i n Stage 4 t h a n i n
Stage
3.
In
addition,
data
c o l l e c t e d i n S t a g e 2 and n o t u s e d
i n S t a g e 3 o f t e n become c r i t i c a l l y
This
is
important
i n S t a g e 4.
p a r t i c u l a r l y true f o r determination
of a specific s i t e selection or
in
t h e e v a l u a t i o n of
s e c o n d a r y and
t e r t i a r y socioeconomic e f f e c t s t h a t
are
i m p l i e d by a s p e c i f i c p r o j e c t
selection.

A t Stage 4 o f
the planning
process,
a1 1
information
sources--agencies
at all
levels,
civic
groups,
and
private
s o u r c e s - - m u s t b e used i n o r d e r
to
have access t o t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a .
Processing data from d i f f e r e n t data
banks t h r o u g h t h e use o f
computer
facilities
i s becoming t h e r u l e
rather
than t h e exception.
Most
importantly,
assumptions
about
conjectural
data
must b e w e l l
explained,
justified,
and
documented.
The most c r i t i c a l d a t a needs a t
t h i s stage concern t h e f i n a n c i a l ,
political,
legal-regulatory,
organizational,
and
personnel
aspects.

fa) Financial
4

and
data

Although
Stage
2
of
the
planning process--data
collection
and p r o c e s s i n g - - h a s been i d e n t i f i e d
as t h e s t a g e d u r i n g w h i c h d a t a
a c t i v i t i e s are
emphasized,
the

When
sever a 1
1 eve1 s
of
government a r e i n v o l v e d ,
knowledge
of
t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f funds from
e a c h l e v e l o f g o v e r n m e n t i s needed.
federal,
I n t h e U . S . , f o r example,
state,
local,
and o f t e n r e g i o n a l
f u n d i n g s may b e r e q u i r e d o r
are
available.
Furthermore,
information
on
approaches
to

-56-

c o s t - s h a r i n g and
revenue-sharing
and t h e i r i m p a c t o n t h e p l a n c o u l d
be e s s e n t i a l
to
the
ultimate
success o f t h e p l a n implementation.
Often,
t h e r e a r e p l a n s f o r one
level of
g o v e r n m e n t (e.g., s t a t e )
t h a t a r e mandated b y a n o t h e r
level
of
government
(e.g..
federal).
''Who s h o u l d pay f o r w h a t ? "
is a
and
challenging
q u e s t i on,
i n f o r m a t i o n o n r e l a t e d and r e l e v a n t
precedence m i g h t be v e r y h e l p f u l .

counties,
districts,
and r e g i o n a l
agencies.
The p l a n n e r s ,
i n their
s e l e c t i o n of
t h e f i n a l p l a n , must
be
cognizant
of
the
mutual
imp1 i c a t i o n s and
impacts between
these
m u t l i r e g u l a t o r y frameworks
and t h e s e l e c t e d p l a n a s such.
For
example,
differences
in
zoning
codes among a d j a c e n t d i s t r i c t s may
prove t o b e a major
impediment
to
a n i m p o r t a n t component o f t h e p l a n .

I d i Organizational
lbl Political
P l t h o u c h knowledge
about
a
or
bas i n ' s h y d r o 1 o g y ,
re; i on'.s
socioeconomic
gecmsr p h c 1 ogy
d e v e i o p r n e n t , and a m y r i a d o f
other
imperative
factors
seen:: ng 1 y
dominate t h e process
of
water
it i s often
resources planning,
PO: i t i c a l
knowledge--abow?
the
po!itical
climate,
the p o l i t i c a l
w i l i t o support
a plan,
and t h e
political
c o a l i t i o n s t h a t can b e
formed--that i s e s s e n t i a l
t o the
of
failure of
a plan.
success
P o l i t i c a l w i l l i s essential for the
s u p p o r t o f a p l a n , a n d k n o w i n g how
to
marshal
such p o l i t i c a l w i l l
s h o u ! d b e p a r t o f t h e agenda o f t h e
plannins t e a r .
Because a s e l e c t
c ~ o u p can b i c l c k
a pian,
a much
larger
consersdc
amsng t h e
true
stake-holders, i n f l u e n t i a l
groups,
and
a f f e c t e d p a r t i e s should be
a
sought t o r e a l i z e t h e success of
plan.
UndeTstanding t h e p o l i t i c a l
environment
and a p p r e c i a t i n g t h e
positive
effect
of
the
consensus-building
process w i t h i n
t h e p o l i t i c a l system s h o u l d be h i g h
o r t h e p l a n n i n s agenda.

The
v a r i ous
levels
of
government--local, s t a t e , r e g i o n a l ,
and f e d e r a l - - n e e d
t o develop the
appropr i a t e
organization
and
adm i n i s t r a t i v e
st ructbre
to
exercise
the authority for
the
management o f t h e w a t e r
resources
project
provided
by
the
legal-reguiatory
framework.
The
planners should understanding t h a t
the
implementation o f
their plan
r e q u i r e s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s u c h an
appropriate
organizational
and
administrative
structure.
Thus,
information
collected
on
the
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l aspect a t t h i s s t a g e
of
the p l a n n i n g process can p r o v e
to all
t o be extremely beneficial
concerned p a r t i e s .
In particular,
when t h e p l a n n e r s c o n s i d e r
the
h i e r a r c h i ca 1
decision-making
s t r u c t u r e w i t h i n which the p l a n i s
developed,
t h e i r knowledge a b o u t
the
centralized
and/or
responsibilities
d e c e n t r a l i zed
among t h e v a r i o u s p a r t i e s c a n o n l y
be h e l p f u l t o the p l a n n i n g process.

l e ) Personnel

/ c l Legal - Re_ou/atory

Knor;ledge o f t h e v a r i o u s
iegal
and r e g u l a t o r y s y s t e m s t h a t a f f e c t
and a r e a f f e c t e d b y a p l a n i s
needed.
Cons i d e r
the
multi regulatory
frameworks
associated w i t h a l o c a l
government
with
i t s various municipalities,

Comprehensive p l a n n i n g f o r
a
r i v e r b a s i n or o t h e r w a t e r r e s o u r c e
n e c e s s i t a t e s comprehensive p l a n n i n g
for
qilai i f i e d
and
trained
personnel.
P a s t e x p e r i e n c e shows
t h a t one way t o e n s u r e a more
harmonious
implementation of
the
p l a n i s t o make e a r l y p r e p a r a t i o n
to
f i l l the
for
qualified staff
v a r i e t y o f needed p o s i t i o n s ,
both

-57-

scientific-technical
(e.g.,
eng i n e e r s ,
hydrologists,
soil-scientists,
mode 1 e r s
and
computer
analysts,
agronomists,
and
etc.)
admi n i s t r a t i v e - 1 ega 1
(e.g.,
managers,
1 awyer s ,
economists,
planners,
clerks,
i t takes
etc.).
The f a c t
that
c o n s i d e r a b l e e f f o r t t o p r e p a r e an
adequate
staff
requires
that
i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f
such p e r s o n n e l
be sought by t h e
planners a t t h i s
stage o f
the
planning
process.
A carefully
p l a n n e d t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m must b e
proposed
as p a r t o f
the t o t a l
package.

5.4

The
role
of
modeling,
simulation and optimization

S i m p l e and a g g r e g a t e models a r e
3.
Thus,
in
used
in
Stage
t r a d i n g - o f f between a c c u r a c y o n t h e
one
hand
and
computational
f e a s i b i l i t y . on
the
other,
the
planner
often
tips
the balance
toward t h e
latter
in
order
to
generate
fast,
reasonable,
and
plausible
results.
I n S t a g e 4,
however, t h e b a l a n c e s h o u l d b e moved
i n f a v o u r a g r e a t a c c u r a c y and more
detai 1.
Furthermore,
Stage
4
necess i t a t e s
the
use
of
a1 1
a v a i l a b l e s y s t e m a t i c procedures o f
systems a n a l y s i s i n o r d e r t o r e f i n e ,
augment,
and
adopt
the
models
employed.
Some s p e c i f i c s u g g e s t i o n s
a b o u t how t o do t h e s e f o l l o w :
To r e f i n e
:
Modify
and/
or
delete
w ithout
chang i n g
structure.

coefficients
constraints
the
bas i c

To augment:
Use o t h e r m o d e l s .
For
example,
use s i m u l a t i o n t o t e s t
and v e r i f y
the
results
of
optimization.
The o t h e r m o d e l s
may now i n c l u d e a s p e c t s
not
previously
considered
explicitly,
s u c h as a d e t a i l e d
modeling o f t h e o p e r a t i o n , which
appeared i n a s i m p l i f i e d f o r m
earlier.
To a d o p t :
Use m o d e l s d e v e l o p e d b y
others,
o r compare r e s u l t s w i t h
those generated b y o t h e r s .

An i m p o r t a n t r e q u i s i t e f o r
the
v i a b l e u s e of m o d e l s i n t h e p l a n n i n g
process
i s t h e p e r c e p t i o n (by t h e
p l a n n e r s and t h e p u b l i c )
of
their
credibility
(see a l s o S e c t i o n 4 . 4 ) .
The a s s u r a n c e t h a t model r e s u l t s a r e
r e l i a b l e i s i m p e r a t i v e i n S t a g e 4.
I f t h e models s u f f e r s from f u z z i n e s s
3, t h i s w i l l n o t as
in
Stage
adversely a f f e c t
t h e soundness
of
the f i n a l
p r o j e c t s e l e c t i o n as i f
t h i s occurs
i n Stage
4.
Most
importantly,
t h e e n t i r e s t u d y can
lose the participatory
support of
the
concerned
a g e n c i e s and t h e
p u b l i c i f t h e m o d e l s and p r o c e d u r e s
u s e d a r e p e r c e i v e d as
lacking i n
credibility
and
scientific
grounding.

An i n t e g r a t e d u s e o f s i m u l a t i o n
and o p t i m i z a t i o n has p r o v e n t o b e
most e f f e c t i v e
i n many s t u d i e s and
has become t h e
preferred
modus
of
systems
analysis
operand i
practitioners.
Depending on
the
spec i f i c
needs
of
a
model,
o p t i m i z a t i o n and
simulation
are
related
i n one o f
the following
ways :
i)

O p t i m i z a t i o n may b e f o l l o w e d
simulation.

by

i i ) O p t i m i z a t i o n may b e i n c l u d e d
simulation.

in

i i ) S i m u l a t i o n may b e used f o r model

quantification
(primarily
the
quantification
of
objective
functions)
and
followed
by
optimization.
v)

S i m u l a t i o n may b e u s e d as a
search technique f o r i d e n t i f y i n g
a n optimum.

The u s e o f
s i m u l a t i o n as a
search
technique o f t e n occurs
in
complex p r o b l e m s w i t h a l a r g e number
of
a l t e r n a t i v e s and w i t h
limited
a v a i l a b l e computing f a c i l i t i e s .
The
e x c l u s i v e use o f
optimization
(in
the generation of operational rules)
of ten
requi r e s
that
the
stochasticity i s dealt with
i n an
a p p r o x i m a t e way.
T h i s p r o b l e m may
be a l l e v i a t e d
by
the
use
of
stochastic
hydrology,
I .e.,

-58-

objective
techniques.
If
no
such
historical
data
base
exists,
the
probability
random f u t u r e
d i s t r i b u t i o n of
events
can
be
described
the
based u p 0
s u b j e c t iv e 1 y ,
and
best
available
insight
judgment.

s i m u l a t i o n o f system o p e r a t i o n b a s e d
s y n t h e t i c hydrology
and o t h e r
a r t i f i c i a l l y generated data.

on

5.5 Risk and uncertainty

The f a c t t h a t w a t e r
resources
systems--public
and
private--are
planned,
designed,
constructed,
operated,
and
modified
under
conditions of
r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y
that
the
numerous
necess i t a t e s
e l e m e n t s o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y be
considered throughout
the planning
p r o c e s s , and p a r t i c u l a r l y d u r i n g t h e
development o f f i n a l s t u d y r e s u l t s .

to
I t
is
often
usef u1
distinguish
among
t h e f o l ow i ng
three risk-related
situations that
reflect
the different
leve s of
risk
information
available
for
assessment and management:
risk
situations--situations
in
w h i c h t h e p o t e n t i a l outcome can
by
reasonabl y
be
d e s c r i bed
well-known
probability
distributions.

Risk
i s associated w i t h the
p o s s i b i l i t y o f s u f f e r i n g harm, l o s s ,
danger, f a i l u r e ,
o r o t h e r adverse
e f f e c t s as a r e s u l t o f t a k i n g a n
I t
a c t i o n o r a sequence o f a c t i o n s .
c o n s i s t s o f t h e f o l l o w i n g two b a s i c
elements:
( i ) magnitude o f t h e r i s k
and
(ii)
the
likelihood it w i l l
cause harm or a d v e r s e e f f e c t s .
To
d e s c r i b e a r i s k y s i t u a t i o n , we m u s t
t h e r e f o r e adequately d e s c r i b e these
two b a s i c e l e m e n t s .

imprecision
situations-situations
having
potential
o u tcomes
that
cannot
be
in
terms
of
descr i bed
o b j e c t i v e l y known
probability
distributions,
b u t w h i c h c a n be
e s t i ma t e d
by
s u b j e c t i ve
probabi 1 i t i e s

The
U.S.
Water
Resources
t o u n c i 1 (1 980) i d e n t i f i e s two m a j o r
s o u r c e s o f r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y :

1.

2.

R i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y a r i s e from
measurement
e r r o r s and from t h e
of
underlying
variability
complex
natural,
social,
and.
economic s i t u a t i o n s .
If
the
a n a l y s t i s u n c e r t a i n because t h e
data
are
imperfect
or
the
a n a l y t i c a l t o o l s crude, t h e p l a n
is
subject
to
measurement
errors,
and t h e s e o b v i o u s l y c a n
be m i n i m i z e d by
improved d a t a
and r e f i n e d a n a l y t i c t e c h n i q u e s .
Some
future
demographic,
hydrologic,
and
econom i c ,
meteorological
events
are
essentially
unpredictable
because
they are subject
to
random i n f l u e n c e s .
The a n a l y s t
whether
the
must
dec i de
randomness c a n b e d e s c r i b e d by
some p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n .
I f there i s a h i s t o r i c a l
data
base t h a t
i s applicable t o the
future,
d i s t r i b u t i o n s can
be
described
or
approximated by

uncertainty
situations-situations
i n which p o t e n t i a l
outcomes c a n n o t be d e s c r i b e d
in
terms
of
objectively
cr
subjectively
known p r o b a b i l i t y
distributions
These a r e n o t m e r e l y a b s t r a c t
definitions;
r a t h e r , each s i t u a t i o n
requires the
use
of
different
for
approaches
and
tool s
quantifiction
or
evaluation
purposes.
The
total
risk
issue
is
addressed t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f
r i s k assessment and management.
To
perform t h e complete process o f r i s k
assessment f o r a p a r t i c u l a r p r o b l e m ,
the
f o l l o w i n g t a s k s need t o be
c a r r i e d o u t (Haimes 1981) :
1)

Risk
identification,
which
involves i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f
the
nature,
types,
and s o u r c e s o f
r i s k s and u n c e r t a i n t i e s .
In
general,
t h e major types o f
risks
are
financial,
health-related,
environmental,

-59-

technical,
and
techno o g i c a l
and
(e.g.,
performance
The
end
supportabi 1 i ty)
is a
product
of
t h i s task
risky
complete d e s c r i p t i o n o f
e v e n t s and e l e m e n t s o f maj o r
their
concern
along
wi-th
causa t i v e
and
factors
mechanisms.

2)

Risk
quantification,
which
entails formulating appropriate
measures o f r i s k and e s t i m a t i n g
the likelihood (probability)
of
occurrence o f
a l l consequences
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r i s k y e v e n t s as
well
as t h e m a g n i t u d e o f such
consequences.

3)

R i s k e v a l u a t i o n , which
includes
se 1 e c t i o n
of
evaluation
procedures
(e.g.
optimizing
expected
v a 1 ue,
trade-off
ana 1 y s i s)
and
analysis
of
impacts
of
v a r i ous poss i b 1 e
r i s k y events.

4)

R i s k a c c e p t a n c e and a v e r s i o n ,
which r e q u i r e
decision-making
regarding
b o t h an a c c e p t a b l e
l e v e l o f r i s k and i t s e q u i t a b l e
distribution.
T h i s phase o f
r i s k assessment a l s o
involves
t h e development o f r i s k c o n t r o l
(i.e.,
measures t o r e d u c e o r
prevent r i s k )

5)

R i s k management, w h i c h
involves
the formulation of policies, the
development
of
risk-control
o p t i o n s ( i .e.
methods t o r e d u c e
or p r e v e n t r i s k ) , and e x e c u t i o n
o f such p o l i c y o p t i o n s .

The l a s t t w o s t a g e s o f
the
risk-assessment
p r o c e s s - - r i sk
a c c e p t a n c e and a v e r s i o n and r i s k
management--overlap
to
a
large
e x t e n t and r e q u i r e t h e s u b j e c t i v e
j udgmen t
of
the
appropriate
decision-makers
i n trading-off the
noncommensurate
beneficial
and
a d v e r s e consequences r e s u l t i n g f r o m
u1 t i m a t e
"acceptable
r i sk"
the
decision.
The e x i s t e n c e o f t h e s e
fundamental
trade-offs
among
conflicting
and
noncommensurate
multiple objectives
and a t t r i b u t e s
demands t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f
risk
management as an
i n t e g r a l p a r t of

the
overa 1 1
dec i s on-mak i ng
process--wh i ch
is the
mperat i v e
p r e m i se assumed h e r e .
I t
IS
i n s t r u c t ve
to
articulate,
at
t h i s s age,
the
d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p r o c e s s o f
risk
assessment
and
the
m e t h o d o l o g i e s o f r i s k assessment.
The p r o c e s s o f r i s k assessment
i s the aggregation o f interactions
with
decision-makers
in
the
application
of
risk
assessment
approaches.
(These
i n t e r a c t ions
i n v o l v e t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s and t h e
e x e r c i s e o f v a l u e judgments.)
The
methodologies
of
risk
assessment
are
the
techniques
u t i l i z e d i n a s c i e n t i f i c approach t o
e s t imat ing
probabilities
and
risk
assessment
p e r f o r m in g
(excluding the a p p l i c a t i o n o f value
j u d g m e n t s ) --an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f
the
process.
I t i s also noteworthy t h a t
the
r i s k assessment p r o c e s s - - t h e s e t t i n g
of
v a 1 ue
judgments
and
quantifiction--is
critically
important,
because
it facilitates
the educational
process
of
the
analysts
and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
and
their
understanding
of
the
methodologies.
In
turn,
the
methodologies s e r v e as
important
stimuli
for d e c i s i o n
(in addition
to
their
contribution
to
the
quantification of
i n f o r m a t i o n and
its
transformation
into
if
the
i n t e l l igence),
even
methodologies
themselves a r e
not
v e r y good.
Clearly, methodologies
a r e a necessary c o n d i t i o n f o r
a
c r e d i b l e and v i a b l e r i s k assessment
process,
b u t a r e n o t , b y any means,
sufficient.
'

T h i s process
can
help
to
i d e n t i f y and a r t i c u l a t e t h e i s s u e s
upon w h i c h t h e r e i s agreement among
decision-makers,
and a l s o t h o s e f o r
w h i c h t h e r e i s n o agreement.
The
process
a l s o h e l p s t o make t h e
implicit explicit.
T h i s outcome,
however,
may
embarrass
decision-makers
under
certain
circumstances.

-60-

The u l t i m a t e e f f i c a c y o f
risk
assessment
in
water
resources
p l a n n i n g and management
can
be
it
measured
by
the
assistance
provides
planners
and
the
decision-makers i n v o l v e d i n p l a n n i n g
and/or
management.
I t renders t h i s
a s s i s t a n c e i n t h e f o l l o w i n g ways:
(a)

I t i d e n t i f i e s t h e sources o f
r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y a s s o c i a t e d
with
exogenous v a r i a b l e s
and
e v e n t s d e r i v e d f r o m demographic,
hydrologic,
econom i c ,
meteorological,
environmental,
institutional,
and
political
factors.

(b)

I t quantifies the
input-output
relationships w i t h respect t o
the
randomness
of
these
exogenous v a r i a b l e s
and e v e n t s
t o t h e degree
possible
and
feasible,
given the constraints
o n d a t a and i n f o r m a t i o n .

(c)

I t quantifies,
to
the degree
possible
and
feasible,
the
p o t e n t i a l o r p r o b a b l e impacts
t h a t r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y and
t h e i r associated trade-offs w i l l
have
on
alternative
policy
decisions.

(d)

It
facilitates
the
decision-making
process
by
e n a b l i n g d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t o make
t h e utmost s c i e n t i f i c use of
informat ion
about
risk
and
uncertainty
related
to
the
t r a d e - o f f and d e c i s i o n a n a l y s i s
o f human f a c t o r s .

5.6 Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis
is
an
i n t e g r a l and i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f S t a g e
4 o f t h e water resources process
because o f t h e
inherent
randomness
of
hydrologic
and s o c i o e c o n o m i c
In the revised Principles
events.
and S t a n d a r d s f o r Water and R e l a t e d
Land R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g ,
Level-C
(Federal
Register
1980),
t h e U.S.
Water
Resources
Council
states:
The
planners
primary r o l e
in
d e a l i n g w i t h r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y i s
t o i d e n t i f y t h e areas of s e n s i t i v i t y
and d e s c r i b e them c l e a r l y so t h a t
d e c i s i o n s c a n be made w i t h k n o w l e d g e

reliability
of
of
the degree o f
available
information.
The
ideas
and m e t h o d o l o g y a d v o c a t e d
in this
s e c t i o n a r e b o t h i n congruence w i t h
and
in
support
of
t h e above
statement.
While there
is
near
unanirni t y
among
water
planners
regarding
the
imperativeness o f
s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s , t h e ways and
means
of
c o n d u c t i n g sens i t i v i t y
a n a l y s i s and i n t e g r a t i n g i t i n t o t h e
o v e r a l l study or p l a n are s t i l l
debatable.
I n p a r t i c u l a r , the trend
has been t o u s e s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s
as a
post-study
and
extrinsic
evaluation
(of the study), r a t h e r
t h a n as a g e n u i n e component o f
the
study i n terms o f t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s
o f t h e r i s k s , c o s t , and b e n e f i t s - - a s
i s proposed h e r e .
The
use
of
comb i ned
u n c e r t a i n t y and s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s
in
water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g has
gained
some
attention
in
the
i n r e c e n t years.
The
literature
u n c e r t a i n t y s e n s i t i v i t y i n d e x method
( U S I M ) d e v e l o p e d b y Haimes and H a l l
(1977)
i s s u c h an example.
I t can
b e shown t h a t a b u s i n e s s - a s - u s u a l
policy
( i g n o r i n g u n c e r t a i n t y and
s e n s i t i v i t y analysis)
can be t o o
c o s t l y i n terms o f d e v i a t i o n from
achieving
the
original
mode-1
objectives.
The U S I M assesses, i n a
mu 1 t i o b j e c t iv e
framework ,
the
t r a d e - o f f s between t h e c o s t o f added
a s s u r a n c e and t h e t h r e a t s posed b y
uncer t a in t y

The d e f i n i t i o n o f r i s k
i n the
t o be
sense
of
an
objective
minimized appears t o b e simple,
but
this
is
deceptive
s i nce
the
minimization of
risk
is
in fact
A t question i s
e x t r e m e l y complex.
usually a
long l i s t o f undesirable
of
outcomes
and
combinations
outcomes, e a c h w i t h a n o n - n e g l i g i b l e
probability o f occurring.
W h i l e i n some c a s e s a s p e c i f i c
quantitatiye
risk
i n d e x can b e
d e f i n e d and u s e d as a n o b j e c t i v e ,
will
b e an
more
often
there
e x c e s s i v e number o f
such
indices.
I n such c a s e s , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t
certain risk-related characteristics
o f t h e s y s t e m can b e
identified,
quantified,
and u s e d t o s e r v e as a

-61-

s i n g l e measure o f
many o f
those
individual r i s k objectives.
Among
these
characteristics,
sensitivity--which
r e l a t e s changes
i n the system's
performance index
(what we have been c a l l i n g o u t p u t )
to
possible
variations
i n the
decision
variables,
constraint
l e v e l s , and u n c o n t r o l l e d p a r a m e t e r s
coefficients) --is
(mode 1
p a r t i c u l a r l y important.

( i i i ) enhancing equal i t y o f economic

opportunity.

for

Furthermore,
( i ) may b e

sub-subobjectives

(i)

i n c r e a s i n g income

(ii)

i n c r e a s i n g consumption
goods and s e r v i c e s

of

( i i i ) i n c r e a s i n g l e i s u r e time

5.7 Uncertainties associated

with goals and objectives

(iv)

Goals
and
objectives--once
a d o p t e d b y t h e p l a n n i n g team--become
t h e dominant f o r c e t h a t d r i v e s t h e
are
planning
process.
Goa 1 s
pos i t i v e
attributes
or
characteristics
strived
for
by
i n d i v i d u a l s or
society.
Goals o f
i n d i v i d u a l s and s o c i e t y
are
an
unbounded s e t ; i . e . , any s t a t e d g o a l
is
included w i t h i n a t
l e a s t one
more-encompassing g o a l , and t h e r e i s
a s e t o f more n a r r o w l y d e f i n e d g o a l s
i t (TECHOM 1 9 7 4 ) . Two m a j o r
within
sources of u n c e r t a i n t y r e l a t e d t o
p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s s h o u l d
be i d e n t i f i e d and a d d r e s s e d a t t h i s
stage of
the
planning
process.
These
are
(i)
perceptions
of
long-term
societal
goals
and
o b j e c t i v e s and ( i i ) p e r c e p t i o n s o f
of
the
long-term
avai l a b i 1 it y
technological
and n o n t e c h n o l o g i c a l
measures
(means)
w i t h which
the
p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s c a n b e
achieved.

It
is
worth
noting
that
s o c i e t a l g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s
are
i n t r i n s i c a l l y hierarchical--a
fact
t h a t m a g n i f i e s what the u n c e r t a i n t y
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h each s u b g o a l
and
subobjective contributes
to
the
u n c e r t a i n t y of the overall s o c i e t a l
g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s .
Consider, f o r
example,
t h a t enhancing
economic
o p p o r t u n i t y i s an i m p o r t a n t s o c i e t a l
g o a l i n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s (TECHOM
1974).
The f o l l o w i n g many c o n s i t u t e
a set o f subobjectives of t h i s goal:
(i)

enhanc i ng
standards

present

1 iving

(i i)

enhancing
s tandards

future

1 iving

increasing s t a b i l i t y
t h e economy

of

A f u r t h e r look a t t h e h i e r a r c h y
of sub-subobjectives f o r (iv)
above
may b e
(i)

increasing t h e growth r a t e
o f p e r c a p i t a income

( i i ) decreasing the r a t e
i n f l a t i o n nationwide
( i i i)reducing
unemployment
(iv)

of

present

reducing present
f a i lure,

business

and so o n .
The p o i n t
is that
there are
myriad
sources
of
errors
and
uncertainties
i n t h e d a t a base, t h e
m o d e l l i n g assumptions,
t h e models
t h e m s e l v e s , and human p e r c e p t i o n s ;
moreover,
these
errors
and
uncertainties are associated w i t h
a l l l e v e l s o f g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s ,
w h i c h means
t h a t t h e p l a n n i n g team
must make a c o n c e r t e d e f f o r t
to
a c c o u n t f o r them, e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g
the stage o f f i n a l p l a n s e l e c t i o n .
T h i s a c c o u n t a b i l i t y can be a c h i e v e d
through
the
use
of
quantitative-empirical
methods o r
heuristic-normative
approaches,
or
t h r o u g h an a p p r o p r i a t e c o m b i n a t i o n
o f both.
The same a r g u m e n t a p p l i e s
to
uncertainties associated w i t h
the
perception o f
t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of
1 ong- t e r m
technological
and
nontechnological
means o f a c h i e v i n g
t h e p l a n n i n g g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s .
This
is particularly
true for the

a s s e s s m e n t o f f u t u r e t e c h n o l o g y and
re1 iabi 1 i ty,
and
its
cost ,
acceptability.
Any one o f
numerous
examples,
f r o m DDT t o a s b e s t o s t o
s o l i d - w a s t e d i s p o s a l , can s e r v e as a
case i n p o i n t .
T h u s , t h e p l a n n i n g team s h o u l d
the
assess
and
eva 1 u a t e
u n c e r t a i n t i e s associated w i t h the
wh i c h
the
se 1 ec t e d
goa 1 s u p o n
plan(s)
a r e g r o u n d e d and w i t h t h e
ways
and
means
(measures)
of
r e a l i z i n g these g o a l s .

5.8

Impact analysis and

policy analysis

An i m p o r t a n t g o a l o f
systems
analysis
is
the
reduction
of
or
undeserved
un i n t e n d e d
consequences.
Impact
analysis,
which i s the p a r t o f p o l i c y a n a l y s i s
i ssues,
concerned
with
these
c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e achievement o f
t h i s g o a l by t h e
identification,
evaluation,
and
alleviation
of
p r o j e c t e d adverse e f f e c t s .
While
the
planning
a l t e r n a t i v e s i n Stage 3 a r e screened
on t h e b a s i s o f a g g r e g a t e d a t a and
s i m p l i f i e d system
representation,
the
l e v e l o f accuracy a t t h a t stage
does n o t a l l o w t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f
a l l p r i m a r y and s e c o n d a r y i m p a c t s i n
sufficient detail.
However,
in
Stage
4,
the
environmental,
economic, and s o c i a l
impacts
of
a
few
selected
a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e c o n s i d e r e d i n more
depth.
Several
systems
analysis
methodologies
are
available for
impact
and
pol icy
analyses,
i n c l u d i n g t h e L e o p o l d m a t r i x and t h e
rnultiobjecive
multistage
impact
a n a l y s i s method
(Gomide and Haimes
1984). G e n e r a l l y , i m p a c t and p o l i c y
a n a l y s e s can be c a r r i e d o u t on two
separate,
albeit
somehow
overlapping,
levels.
One l e v e l o f
a n a l y s i s i s endogenous--pertinent t o
the water
r e s o u r c e s system models
i n the planning. This level
used
includes
the
sensitivity
and
uncertainties associated w i t h
the
modelers'
assumptions
about
the
and
their
structure,
mode 1 s
topology,
parameters,
d a t a bases,

o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques,
etc.
To
some e x t e n t , endogenous i m p a c t s a r e
c o n t r o l l a b l e by t h e m o d e l e r .
The
o t h e r l e v e l o f a n a l y s i s i s exogenous
t o t h e models and c o n c e n t r a t e s o n
the
influence o f various p o l i c y
o p t i o n s on t h e o v e r a l l s o c i o e c o n o m i c
to
e n v i r o n m e n t and how i t i s l i k e l y
A water
react to t h i s
influence.
p r o j e c t can have an i m p a c t on many
aspects
of
society--education,
population
distribution,
transportation,
h e a l t h s a f e t y , and
economic
dislocation.
From
a
welfare
economic
perspective,
a
l a r g e investment
i n any
sector,
including
the
water
sector,
precludes
f u n d s and r e s o u r c e s f r o m
g o i n g t o o t h e r s e c t o r s i n any g i v e n
economy.
International
funding
a g e n c i e s a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y eager
to
e v a l u a t e such a s p e c t s b e f o r e t h e y
fund
large-scale water
projects.
The
impact a n a l y s i s
component
is
p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t i n Stage 4 o f
t h e p l a n n i n g process,
where e v e r y
p l a n or p o l i c y o p t i o n should be
accompanied b y p o l i c y a n a l y s i s - - s o
that
all
future
and
project
consequences
(both f a v o r a b l e
and
unfavourable)
should be i d e n t i f i e d ,
assessed, q u a n t i f i e d ( t o t h e e x t e n t
p o s s i b l e ) , and i n t e g r a t e d w i t h i n t h e
decision-making process.
~

Impact a n a l y s i s
and
policy
analysis
should
be particularly
f o c u s e d on t h e r i s k a n d u n c e r t a i n t y
associated
with
water
resources
p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n m a k i n g .
The
planning a c t i v i t y ,
by definition,
r e p r e s e n t s f u t u r i s t i c a s p e c t s , where
elements of
r i s k and u n c e r t a i n t y
dominate socioeconomic, demographic,
environmental,
and
institutional
p r o j e c t ions.

5.9 Model(s) as part

study product

of

the

Two c a t e g o r i e s o f models c a n b e
i d e n t i f i e d as a b y - p r o d u c t
of
he
study:
(a) models u s e d f o r
t h e p l a n n ng
process,
w h i c h may be m o d e l s
developed s p e c i f i c a l l y
for
the
study
o r adopted from o t h e r
water resources p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s

-63-

(b) m o d e l s f o r t h e o p e r a t i o n o f
s y s t e m t o be implemented

the

These models may be d e v e l o p e d

as
planning-for-operation
models
during
the
planning
or design
process.
Each o f t h e two c a t e g o r i e s
o f m o d e l s s h o u l d be w e l l a d a p t e d t o
e x i s t i n g computer
facilities
and
must b e p r e s e n t e d t o t h e u s e r
in a
form
suitable
for
proper
and
efficient utilization.
I f one a c c e p t s t h e p r e m i s e t h a t
planning
is
a
con t i nuous ,
never-ending
process
for
which
appropriate institutional conditions
must b e c r e a t e d , t h e n t h e i m p o r t a n c e
o f m o d e l s as a p a r t o f t h e s t u d y
p r o d u c t c a n n o t be o v e r emphasized.
This,
in
particular,
refers to
large-scale,
long-term
planning
studies.
I n a l l c a s e s , t h e second
t y p e o f m o d e l s m e n t i o n e d above
is
important.
Making t h e model p a r t o f
t h e p r o d u c t means t h a t t h e c u s t o m e r
w i l l be i n a p o s i t i o n t o c o n t i n u e
the
work.
In
addition,
this
transfer
of
t h e model a l s o e n t a i l s
transfer
of
ideas,
communication
w i t h t h e c l i e n t s a t a very d e t a i l e d
level,
closing credibility
gaps,
etc.
The s u b j e c t o f models as p a r t
o f the study product brings t o focus
the
important
issues of technology
transfer,
mode4 ma i n t e n a n c e ,
and
clearinghouses
f o r models;
these
issues were addressed i n d e t a i l
in
1982 s t u d y b y t h e O f f i c e o f
the
Technology
Assessment,
U.S.
Congress ( U . S .
OTA 1982).
In
large
and
complicated
s t u d i e s , models a r e o f t e n c o n s i d e r e d
as
part
of
the project
t o be
d e l i v e r e d t o the customer, i n c l u d i n g
an o p e r a b l e p r o g r a m o f
t h e model
that
i s s u i t a b l e t o the customer's
computer f a c i l i t i e s .
These m o d e l s
may p r o v e t o be m o s t v a l u a b l e t o t h e
customer
for
future
use
for
reevaluation of
new d a t a o r
for
modifications
in
the
original
in
project
required
by changes
exogenous
variables
or
demand
parameters.
The
model
and
its
computer
p r o g r a m s h o u l d be
made
a v a i l a b l e t o t h e c u s t o m e r i n what i s

known a s u s e r - f r i e n d l y p a c k a g e s and
s h o u l d b e w e l l documented, w i t h
all
s t e p s made t r a n s p a r e n t t h r o u g h f l o w
charts, text
statements,
examples,
and f i g u r e s .
The t r a i n i n g o f
personnel
who
can o p e r a t e and u s e t h e s e m o d e l s - - a n
integral
part
of
a
project's
product--is often essential.
Sadly,
t h i s o f t e n c o n s t i t u t e s one o f t h e
weakest
links
in
the
planning
process.
I t should b e the p r a c t i c e
i n development a i d p r o j e c t s t o l e a v e
a l l t h e s o f t w a r e t h a t has been u s e d
with
the
receiving
counterpart
agency,
and
i n some p r o j e c t s e v e n
t h e computers w i l l
need
to
be
supplied.
Accordingly, the t r a i n i n g
of
personnel
Plays
an
e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g importance.
This i s
particularly critical
(and a l m o s t
imperative) i n developing countries.

5.10 Planning for operation

Planning f o r
operation,
which
g e n e r a l l y leads t o t h e generation o f
operational
rules f o r the p r o j e c t ,
i s p e r h a p s one o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t
technical
steps
i n the
planning
process.
I t
i s a l s o t h e most
i n t e n s i v e systems
analysis
step,
where t h e synergism r e s u l t i n g f r o m
the i n t e g r a t i o n o f
s i m u l a t i o n and
optimization
i s most e v i d e n t i n i t s
potency.
Although the operational
rules
generated
in
the
planning-for-operation
step
are
developed f o r
the e n t i r e planning
horizon, they a r e n o t expected t o be
followed t o the l e t t e r i n actuality.
Indeed, t h e s e o p e r a t i o n a l r u l e s a r e
o f t e n m o d i f i e d once t h e p r o j e c t i s
compl e t e d
and
the
real-world
o p e r a t i o n commences.
However, t h e y
do s e r v e t h e f o l l o w i n g
important
o b j e c t i v e s i n the p l a n n i n g process:
(a)

P r o v i d e an a n a l y t i c a l mechanism
w i t h which t o develop design
c r i t e r i a and, t h u s , o p t i m i z e t h e
p r o j e c t des i gn.

(b) E n a b l e t h e p l a n n e r - d e s i g n e r
to
b e t t e r understand the couplings
among t h e v a r i o u s
subsystems
( r e s e r v o i r s , r i v e r s , groundwater
and,
systems,
e t c .)
consequently, t o account f o r t h e

-64-

s y s t e m s c o n s t r a i n t s and
attributes.
(c)

systems

Enable t h e agency, o r
agencies,
responsible for
operating
the
project
t o i n i t i a t e contractual
agreements w i t h ,
for
example,
e l e c t r i c power
utilities
or
water
supply d i s t r i c t s .
These
c o n t r a c t s can be v e r y
tight
in
their
d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m and,
therefore, a well-developed
set
of
o p e r a t i o n a l r u l e s c a n become
an
essential
ingredient
in
e n s u r i n g t h e o v e r a l l success o f
the project.

(d) May l e a d t o d i s c o v e r y o f
major
gaps
i n d a t a needs.
In this
a new d a t a
collection
case,
process
c a n b e s t a r t e d much
e a r l i e r than otherwise.
(e) May h e l p t o u n c o v e r e a r l y s i g n s
o f c o n f l i c t s w i t h o t h e r agencies
and/or water r e s o u r c e s o p e r a t i n g
enti ties.
In
t h i s case,
a
process o f
n e g o t i a t i o n may b e
i n i t i a t e d and/or
some o f
the
p r o j e c t d e s i g n may b e a l t e r e d t o
accommodate
these
new1 y
discovered
institutional
or
organizational constraints.

(f) Provide
an
indispensable
t r a i n i n g medium f o r
t h o s e who
a r e c o m m i s s i o n e d t o o p e r a t e and
it
is
manage t h e p r o j e c t when
completed.
(9)

A s s i s t i n t h e development
of
a
cost-sharing
formula f o r
the
p r o j e c t (as a p p r o p r i a t e )

These and
other
objectives
associated
with
the operational
r u l e s d i c t a t e t h a t t h e p l a n n i n g team
adhere
to
a
well-conducted
planning-for-operation
step
i n the
p l a n n i n g process.

5.11 Modes of presenting the

plan to the decision-makers
A good s y s t e m s t u d y
loses
its
v a l u e when t h e s y s t e m a n a l y s t i s n o t
the
able
to
conv i nce
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r (s)
of
the
study
usefulness.
Therefore,
the
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r ( s ) s h o u l d be i n v o l v e d
a s much as p o s s i b l e i n t h e p r o c e s s

of
mode 1
building,
mode 1
optimization,
and
mode 1
presentation.
The s t u d i e s t h a t h a v e
f o u n d t h e b e s t a c c e p t a n c e and t h a t
a r e a c t u a l l y implemented a r e m o s t l y
studies i n which the decision-makers
have been so c l o s e l y i n v o l v e d t h a t
t h e y i d e n t i f y w i t h them.
However, i n many s t u d i e s
such
an
i n v o l v e m e n t i s n o t p o s s i b l e , and
the analyst
has t o c o n v i n c e t h e
decision-makers o f t h e e f f i c a c y o f
the
finished
product.
Most
important i s t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e
s t u d y must b e p r e s e n t e d i n a c l e a r
and c o n v i n c i n g manner,
with
as
l i t t l e t e c h n i c a l j a r g o n as p o s s i b l e .
The t e x t s h o u l d be accompanied w i t h
meaningful
and
self-explanatory
figures.
Only f i g u r e s t h a t d i r e c t l y
r e l a t e t o t h e r e s u l t s should be
shown
i n t h e main t e x t , w i t h a l l
other
material
relegated
to
appendices o r
to special
annexes.
Interaction
with
the
throughout
the
dec i s i on-maker (s)
e n t i r e p l a n n i n g process should be
emphasized--if t h e r e i s i n s u f f i c i e n t
interaction
i n Stage
1,
even t h e
b e s t v i s u a l w i l l n o t h e l p i n Stage

4.
Most s t u d i e s and r e p o r t s w i ' l l
be r e v i e w e d b y p e o p l e r e p r e s e n t i n g a
wide spectrum o f
b a c k g r o u n d s and
interests.
A t e c h n i q u e t h a t can
s u f f i c i e n t l y cover
such a range i s
t o o f f e r t h r e e m a i n segments,
each
written
at
a somewhat d i f f e r e n t
1 eve1 :
(i)

A summary d e v o i d o f t e c h n i c a l
j a r g o n c a n be w r i t t e n t h a t w i l l
be s u i t a b l e f o r
politicians,
bureaucrats,
and
sen i o r
journal ists.

( i i ) The m a i n t e x t c a n be d i r e c t e d
toward
t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l s , who
may h a v e t o a d v i s e b u t who a r e
not
necessarily
directly
i n v o l v e d i n t h e work.

( i i i ) Techn i c a 1
append i ces c a n be
added t h a t a r e aimed a t t h o s e
who e i t h e r a r e a l r e a d y i n v o l v e d
in
t h e p r o j e c t o r who may
later
become
involved a t a
stage.

-65-

For t h i s
l a t t e r category o f
technical experts, the material
in
t h e a p p e n d i c e s m u s t be p r e s e n t e d i n
s u f f i c i e n t d e t a i l t o e n a b l e them t o
contrad ic t
if
check,
ver if y ,
appropriate,
or
change
parameter
values
i n f u r t h e r work.
A l l these
modes
contribute
toward
the
decision-makers
understanding
of
the results.
There are, o f course, c i i f f e r e n t
l e v e l s o f d e c i s i o n s t h a t must be
made--technical,
political,
etc.
D u r i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l development o f
t h e s t u d y , i t w o u l d be a d v a n t a g e o u s
t o have d i s c u s s i o n s and s h a r e t h e
progress
with
the
i n v o 1v e d
decision-maker.
I n most c a s e s , t h e
decision-maker w i l l be i n t e r e s t e d i n
the extent t o which the planner
has
considered various options.
Another
aspect o f
t h e mode o f p r e s e n t a t i o n
and
communication
with
the
decision-maker
i nvo 1v e s
the
presentation of
trade-offs
in
a
multiobjective
framework.
While i t
i s p o s s i b l e (and i s j u s t as easy) t o
generate trade-offs
between,
say,
recreational
act ivities
in
v i s i t o r / d a y u n i t s and f l o o d damage
in
areas
of
f 1 ooded
1 and,
communication
with
the
decision-maker
i s generally
mueh
easier
and more m e a n i n g f u l i f t h e s e
t r a d e - o f f s ake p r e s e n t e d
i n terms,
say, o f $ / v i s i t o r - d a y and $ / a c r e ( o f
flooded land).
I n such a c a s e , t h e
c o s t f u n c t i o n measured i n m o n e t a r y
u n i t s w i l l be u s e d as t h e p r i m a r y
objective
i n the surrogate worth
trade-off
(SWT)
method
of
the
-constraint formulation.

Fur t h e r m o r e ,
communicating
absolute
values
of
levels
of
objectives
t o t h e decision-makers
(such
as
cost,
flood
damage,
r e c r e a t i o n , e t c . ) i s o f t e n n o t as
meaningful
as
i f these r e s u l t s a r e
communi c a t e d
in
terms
of
a
p e r c e n t a g e o f a b a s e l e v e l (say,
Then,
the
p r e s e n t cond i t i ons)
percentage
of
improvement
(or
d e g r a d a t i o n ) can b e j u x t a p o s e d w i t h
the
absolute
levels,
and
the
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r w i l l be i n a p o s i t i o n
to
judge
for
himself
the
a c h i e v e m e n t s (or l a c k o f t h e m ) .

F i n a l l y , t h e use o f
computer
graphics
through
an
interactive
man-machine
mode
adds
a
new
dimension t o t h e use o f
systems
a n a l y s i s i n water resources p l a n n i n g
(see,
f o r example, Loucks, K i n d l e r ,
and F e d r a ,
1985).

5.12 References

23,

Federal
Register.
1980, 45(190) : 64391

September

F . , and Y . Y .
Haimes.
The
m u 1 t i o b j e c t iv e ,
multistage
i m p a c t a n a l y s i s method:
Theoretical
basis.
IEEE
T r a n s a c t i o n s o n Systems,
Man,
and
88-98.
C y b e r n e t i c s , SMC-14(1), pp.
Gomide,

1984.

Haimes, Y . Y . , and W.A.

Hall.
Sensitivity,
responsivity,
s t a b i l i t y and i r r e v e r s i b i l i t y
as
mu 1 t i p l e
object ives
in
civil
systems.
Advances
in
Water
R e s o u r c e s , 1 ( 2 ) , pp.
71-81.

1977.

Haimes,
Y.Y.
(ed).
1981.
Risk-Benefit
Analysis
in
Water
R e s o u r c e s P l a n n i n g and Management,
Plenum, New York and London.
L o u c k s , D.P.,
J.
Kindler,
and
K.
Fedra.
1985. I n t e r a c t i v e w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s m o d e l i n g and model use:
An
overview.
Water
Resources
R e s e a r c h 1 ( 2 1 ) 95-104
TECHCOM--Technical Committee o n
Water
Resources.
1974
Water
Resources P l a n n i n g ,
S o c i a l Goals,
and
Indicators:
Methodological
Development and E m p i r c a l T e s t ,
for
the
Office
of
Water R e s o u r c e s
Research, U.S.
Department o f
the
Interior,
Utah
Water
Resources
L a b o r a t o r y P u b l i c a t i o n PRWG-131-1,
Logan, U t a h .
U.S.
OTA--U.S.
Office
of
T e c h n o l o g y Assessment.
1982.
Use
o f Models
for
Water
Resources
Management,
P l a n n i n g and P o l i c y .
OTA, W a s h i n g t o n , D . C .

U.S.
Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l .
1980.
P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s f o r
Water a n d R e l a t e d Land R e s o u r c e s
P 1 a n n i ng
Federal
Regi s t e r ,
September 28, 1980.

6. Developing t h e case studies

The p r e v i o u s
chapters
have
d e t a i l e d t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s as a
sequence
of
interacting
but
n e v e r t h e l e s s d i s t i n c t stages.
The
stages
provide
a framework f o r
p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g and t h e y c a n a l s o
function
as
a
framework
for
presenting results o f
the p l a n n i n g
process
i n an o r d e r l y f a s h i o n .
In
f a c t , i t was t h i s approach t h a t was
used
when
i n f o r m a t i o n was b e i n g
gathered on t h e case s t u d i e s t h a t
A l l
f o r m t h e Appendix t o t h i s b o o k .
members o f
t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p were
i n s t r u c t e d t o w r i t e t h e i r case study
r e p o r t s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e scheme l a i d
out i n Fig.
1.1.
T h i s was done t o
give
the
reports
a
certain
uniformity i n spite of
the
large
diversity
represented
by
the
p r o j e c t s r e p o r t e d upon.
The c a s e s t u d y r e p o r t i n g was
further
enhanced b y s u b d i v i d i n g t h e
stages
in t o
more
detai led
categories.
However,
rather
than
p r o v i d i n g a more e l a b o r a t e o u t l i n e
f o r each o f t h e s t a g e s ,
i t seemed
preferable
t o cast
the d i f f e r e n t
a s p e c t s of each s t a g e i n t o q u e s t i o n s
A t o t a l o f about
t o be answered.
t h i r t y q u e s t i o n s was f o u n d t o b e
adequate t o cover
a l l s t a g e s , and
t h e s e a r e l i s t e d i n Appendix I .
6.1 The example case study

To h e l p
with
the
w r i t ng
process,
a n example was p r e p a r e d t o
i l l u s t r a t e how t h e case
s t u d es
s h o u l d b e w r i t t e n and t o g i v e an
i d e a o f what k i n d t h e y s h o u l d be.
I t was a p p a r e n t t o t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p
that
large-scale
international
p l a n n i n g e f f o r t s on v e r y l a r g e water
resources
projects
are o f
less
i n t e r e s t t o the intended r e a d e r s h i p
of
t h i s book t h a n t h e e v e r y d a y
p r o j e c t s done i n member c o u n t r i e s .
I f a c a s e s t u d y shows how u s e f u l
systems a n a l y s i s t e c h n i q u e s
have
been
( o r c o u l d have b e e n ) , a r e a d e r
may be e n c o u r a g e d t o t r y systems

analysis
techniques himself.
This
s o r t o f reasoning l e d t o t h e choice
of
the
example,
a small water
resources
development
scheme
designed f o r t h e s i n g l e purpose o f
flood protection
( w i t h some s i d e
of
low-flow
augmentation
benefits
and r e c r e a t i o n ) .
T h i s example (Case
Study
1) was w o r k e d o u t and s e n t t o
a l l members o f t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p t o
own
written
guide
thei r
presentations.
The c h o i c e o f
p r o j e c t s t o be
r e p o r t e d upon, however, was l e f t t o
t h e members o f
t h e w o r k i n g group,
and t h u s a h e a l t h y m i x o f c a s e s was
obtained.
They
range
from
a
s t u d y from t h e
r e g i o n a l ( L e v e l B)
U.S.
(Case S t u d y 4) t o a n a l m o s t
purely
hydrological
p r e l iminary
s t u d y done
i n Denmark (Case S t u d y
7).
Table 6.1
groups
the
case
studies according t o c e r t a i n t y p i c a l
criteria.
6.2

Instructions used in formulating the case studies

Each case s t u d y b e g i n s w i t h an
introduction
that
out1 ines
the
planning s i t u a t i o n i n the country of
its
location,
along w i t h a b r i e f
description of the project
and
its
origin.
A f t e r t h i s , t h e d e t a i l s of
the study are given,
e x p l a i n e d by
means o f answers
to the
l i s t of
questions.
A1 1
authors
were
instructed t o follow the set of
i n s t r u c t i o n s l i s t e d below.
1.
Case s t u d y r e p o r t s s h o u l d
cover
the entire
project planning
p r o c e s s , d i s c u s s i n g one b y one a l l
of
the
five
planning
stages
Chapter
a r t i c u l a t e d i n F i g u r e 1.1,
1.

2.
One of t h e m a j o r o b j e c t i v e s
o f the e n t i r e e f f o r t
i s t o cast
applications of
system a n a l y s i s i n
terms o f t h e r e a l - w o r l d c o m p l e x i t i e s
of
t h e p l a n n i n g process.
While

-68-

discussing
each o f
the planning
stages,
all
t h e systems a n a l y t i c
methods a p p l i e d s h o u l d b e d e s c r i b e d ,
and e v e n u n s u c c e s s f u l
attempts o f
application of
methods o f f e r e d b y
systems
analysis
should
be
illuminated.

participating
in
the
planning
be p a r t i c u l a r l y
process.
I t will
in
i l l u m i n a t i n g t o d i s c u s s t h e ways
which
conf 1 i c t
situations
were
resolved
(including the application
of b o t h a n a l y t i c
and
heuristic
methods).

3. Especially useful f o r the

project
will
be
background
i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t , w h i l e i t may seem
t o be o f
no p a r t i c u l a r s c i e n t i f i c
v a l u e , may p r o v e t o be o f
critical
v a l u e f o r p r o j e c t development (e.g.,
manpower
l i m i t a t i o n , l a c k o f access
t o computing
installations,
too
s h o r t deadline for r e s u l t s , etc.)

8 . U n c e r t a i n t i e s and r i s k s a r e
inherent i n a l l planning e f f o r t s .
I t should be recognized e x p l i c i t l y
This
how
they
were
hand 1 ed.
concerns
project
o b j e c t iv e s ,
a v a i l a b l e d a t a , model
formulation,
e s t i m a t i o n o f model p a r a m e t e r s , e t c .

4.
I t s h o u l d be r e c o g n i z e d
that
the e n t i r e e f f o r t
concerns
i t s e l f w i t h t h e process o f p r o j e c t s
planning.
These p r o j e c t s may b e o f
d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r and m a g n i t u d e :
in the
however,
our
interest
is
u n d e r t a k i n g s t h a t were p l a n n e d f o r a
r e l a t i v e l y immediate implementation.
Long-term
countrywide
planning
e f f o r t s of a strategic nature are
b e y o n d t h e scope o f t h e work t o b e
u n d e r t a k e n b y o u r W o r k i n g Group.

5. Case s t u d y r e p o r t s s h o u l d
n o t b e l i m i t e d t o water p r o j e c t s o f
a structural
character.
On
the
contrary,
n o n s t r u c t u r a l p r o j e c t s -s u c h a s as f l o o d p l a i n
zoning,
i n t r o d u c t i o n o f water c o n s e r v a t i o n
i n c e n t i v e s v i a r e g u l a t i o n , and w a t e r
p r i c i n g -- w i l l
be o f g r e a t v a l u e
for p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e f i n a l r e p o r t .
6 . I n a l l case study r e p o r t s ,
the
i n s t i t u t i o n a l framework s h o u l d
be i 1 luminated.
Who
originally
conceived the
idea of the p r o j e c t ?
Who
was
charged
with
responsibilities
for
project
planning?
Did project
initiation
i n v o l v e n e g o t i a t i o n s and b a r g a i n i n g
among a l l p a r t i e s c o n c e r n e d ? Was i t
made c l e a r r i g h t a t t h e o u t s e t who
would operate t h e p r o j e c t f o l l o w i n g
i t s implementation?

7 . I n m o s t cases p l a n n i n g i s a
process f u l l o f controversies.
This
leads t o c o n f l i c t s i t u a t i o n s which
arise
from
the m u l t i p l i c i t y of
o b j e c t i v e s and m u l t i t u d e o f
actors
(experts
and
dec i s i on-makers)

9. P r o j e c t s b e i n g d i s c u s s e d i n
these g u i d e l i n e s
normally
don't
allow for
d e v e l o p m e n t o f any m a j o r
d a t a c o l l e c t i o n programmes:
Their
p l a n n i n g must be based on t h e d a t a
available
at
the
moment
of
initiation.
However,
sometimes
" c r a s h programmes" f o r c o l l e c t i o n o f
certain
absolutely
indispensable
data are organized.
I t would be
i n t e r e s t i ng
to
i 1 1u m i n a t e
such
aspects
of
the data c o l l e c t i o n
programmes.
10.
Because o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r
i n t e r e s t o f IHP i n t h e h y d r o l o g i c a l
inputs t o
the
water
resources
planning
process,
the hydrologic
d a t a t h a t were u s e d
should
be
explicitly
recognized
in
the
planning process.
Problems r e l a t e d
natural
t o t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of
hydrology (streamf low s e r i e s ) a r e o f
interest,
as w e l l
as t h e use o f
runoff
models
in
the
rainfall
context o f water resources planning.
11.
I n accordance w i t h t h e
of
this
IHP
overall objectives
i t i s important t h a t the
project,
c a s e s t u d y i s p r e s e n t e d i n such a
way t h a t
l e s s o n s c a n b e drawn t o
improve o n t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s .
What a r e t h e m a i n i m p e d i m e n t s ,
and
how s h o u l d p a s t m i s t a k e s be a v o i d e d ?
In
this
respect,
retrospective
analysis
of
already-implemented
p r o j e c t s t h a t were p l a n n e d w i t h t h e
application
of
systems a n a l y s i s
methods w i l l be o f p a r t i c u l a r v a l u e .

1 2 . These g u i d e l i n e s a r e n o t
necessarily
inclusive.
Each a u t h o r
s h o u l d d i s c u s s i n h i s summary r e p o r t

other
p e r t i n e n t aspects t h a t
he
considered
valuable
and
that
contributed t o achieving the stated
g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s o f
t h i s IHP
project.

6.3 The purpose

the questions

and

scope

of

The t h i r t y
questions,
which
were based o n F i g u r e 1 . 1 , C h a p t e r 1 ,
were p o s e d t o a l l c o n t r i b u t e r s t o
I) .
t h e case s t u d i e s ( s e e Appendix
They w e r e d e s i g n e d t o c o v e r
a1 1
important
aspects
of
t h e case
studies t h a t are r e l a t e d t o p r o j e c t
planning.
The r a t i o n a l e f o r
the
t h i r t y q u e s t i o n s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d
next

Planning Stage
1.
Project
initiation and preliminary planning
F i v e q u e s t i o n s were d i r e c t e d a t
Planning Stage 1 .
The p u r p o s e o f
these
questions
i s to identify
o b j e c t i v e s and p l a n n i n g s t a f f .
Q u e s t i o n 1--Was
the
project
initiated
on
the
basis
of
a
l o n g - t e r m p r o g r a m ? - - was d e s i g n e d t o
set
the
case
study,
into
the
perspective
of
national or
even
international planning,
from which
many b u t n o t a l l p r o j e c t s d e r i v e .
Q u e s t i o n 2--What l e v e l and t y p e
o f s k i l l e d personnel
and a g e n c i e s
were
i n v o l v e d i n t h e various stages
o f the planning process?
Was
the
public
involved,
i n particular i n
the
formulation
of
project
o b j e c t i v e s ? - - c o n s i s t s i n f a c t o f two
separate b u t r e l a t e d questions.
The
first
i s concerned w i t h t h e s t a f f
performing the study.
The second
concerns
pub 1 i c
i nvo 1 vemen t
in
formulating
the
initial
plan
s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . T h i s p u b l i c group
i s not u s u a l l y considered
i n the
e a r l y p l a n n i n g stages o f a p r o j e c t .
However, i t i s t h e c o n v i c t i o n o f t h e
authors
of
t h i s book t h a t a w a t e r
resources p r o j e c t ,
carried out at
any p l a c e i n t h e w o r l d , must i n v o l v e
t h e p e o p l e who a r e t o be s e r v e d
by
it.
It
i s necessary f o r
these
p e o p l e t o b e i n f o r m e d so t h a t t h e y
f u l l y understand the implications o f
the
project
and
the
benefits

d e r i v i n g f r o m i t b e c a u s e t h i s seems
t o be t h e m o s t p r o m i s i ng way
to
generate water
resources p r o j e c t s
t h a t a r e o f l a s t ng b e n e f i t .
Question
3--What
decision
c r i t e r i a w e r e employed
for p r o j e c t
intiation?--covers
the breadth of
possible c r i t e r i a
t h a t may b e u s e d
in different
c o u n t r i e s and u n d e r
different
political
and
economic
systems.
The q u e s t i o n was i n c l u d e d
i n t h e hope o f
discovering
some
generalized conclusions
that could
b e d r a w n o n how t o s e t u p a w a t e r
resources p r o j e c t , but the general
f i n d i n g was t h a t t h e p l a n i n i t i a t i o n
very
seldom proceeded f r o m a b a s i s
t h a t c o u l d be g e n e r a l i z e d .
Q u e s t i o n 4--What
constraints
were posed?--was
intended t o f i n d
the types o f
l i m i t a t i o n s on water
resources p r o j e c t planning t h a t are
accepted
in different
countries,
such
as
issues
of
landscape
modification
or
environmental
protection.
The i n t e n t i o n was a l s o
to f i n d o u t
i f such c o n s t r a i n t s
which are established a t the outset,
whether
they are negotiable,
and
whether t h e y lead t o l i m i t a t i o n s
in
t h e scope o f
the planning or the
scope o f t h e p r o j e c t .
Question 5--Did
all
experts
agree
on
the
methods
to
be
employed?--was
directed
to
the
question of
the composition o f the
planning
staff
and
their
compatibility.
Many
types
of
experts are not w e l l acquainted w i t h
the concepts o f
system a n a l y s i s .
For
example,
an
agricultural
e n g i n e e r who i s an e x p e r t o n w a t e r
d i s t r i b u t i o n s y s t e m s may n o t s e e h i s
part of
the p r o j e c t
i n t h e same
f r a m e as
the
meteorologist
who
discusses
the r a i n f a l l inputs i n t o
an i r r i g a t i o n system.
The
issue
r a i s e d by t h i s q u e s t i o n i s c o n f l i c t
r e s o l u t i o n among e x p e r t s d u r i n g t h e
formulation o f a project.

Planning
Stage
2:
collection and processing

Data

The s e c o n d g r o u p o f
questions
relate
t o P l a n n i n g Stage 2 , on t h e
data
i n v o l v e d and t h e
mode
of

-70-

g a t h e r i n g and a n a l y z i n g them.
Q u e s t i o n 6--What
data
were
used?--concerns
n o t s o much t h e
details of a l l
the data but the
networks
that
are available
in
v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s and t h e t y p e s o f
d a t a t h a t a r e b e i n g used
i n the
analysis.
Not everywhere
is
a
network a v a i l a b l e ;
o f t e n i t should
b e i n s t a l l e d when i t d o e s n o t e x i s t ,
it is
not
b u t e v e n more o f t e n
This
i s the
p o s s i b l e t o d o so.
subject of
Q u e s t i o n 7--Were
only
e x i s t i n g d a t a used? But Q u e s t i o n 7
goes f u r t h e r
i n suggesting t h a t i t
i s p o s s i b l e a l s o t o upgrade t h e d a t a
base b y
continuing
measurements
d u r i n g t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , o r even
during
the
f i r s t phase o f
the
operation of the project.
I n a more
sophisticated planning e f f o r t , i t i s
possible t o trade-off length o f data
records against design uncertainty.
To f i n d o u t i f s u c h t e c h n i q u e s were
used, Q u e s t i o n 8--Were OR t e c h n i q u e s
u s e d t o d e c i d e o n t h e method o f d a t a
collection
and
length of
data
r e c o r d s ?--was
asked.
I t
is a
d i f f i c u l t p r o b l e m t o o b t a i n economic
and
other
input
data
for
i nc 1 ud i ng
optimization
models,
monetary o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s .
I t is
o f g r e a t i n t e r e s t t o f i n d o u t how
such d a t a a r e s e c u r e d i n d i f f e r e n t
countries.
T h i s i s t h e purpose o f
Q u e s t i o n g--Was
a programme s e t up
t o take stock o f
and/or
utilize
c r i t e r i a data?
Finally,
Question
10--Were any s p e c i a l methods u s e d t o
a n a l y z e t h e d a t a ? - - w a s aimed a t t h e
r e s e a r c h a s p e c t o f d a t a a n a l y s i s and
t h e s p e c i a l methods o f h a n d l i n g such
t h i n g s as p r o b l e m d a t a b a s e s o r
s c a r c e o r unusual t y p e s o f d a t a .

Planning Stage 3:
Formulation
and screening
of
project
alternatives
The t h i r d g r o u p o f q u e s t i o n s
concerns t h e f o r m u l t i o n o f p r o j e c t
a l t e r n a t i v e s , S t a g e 3.
One r e s u l t
of
the planning
i n i t i a t i o n phase
(Stage
1) i s a l a t e r phase i n w h i c h
d a t a a r e g a t h e r e d and a l t e r n a t i v e s
are
formulated.
Note t h a t
this
process u s u a l l y involves a p r o j e c t
team.
Thus,
the f i r s t questions,
Q u e s t i o n 11--What
resources
were

used?--and Q u e s t i o n 12--What t y p e o f
institutional
s u p p o r t was p r o v i d e d
for
clearing
the
planning?--are
designed t o g i v e a background on t h e
p l a n n i n g team, w h i l e Q u e s t i o n l 3 - - T o
what
extent
did
the
public
participate?--is
intended to f i n d
o u t i f t h e p l a n n i n g was done b y
agencies o n l y , o r whether s c r e e n i n g
of a l t e r n a t i v e s also
involved the
concerned p u b l i c .
Question 2 , which
also
inquired
about
pub1 i c
participation,
only
covers
the
project
i n i t i a t i o n phase,
whereas
Q u e s t i o n 13 was d e s i g n e d t o add
i n f o r m a t i o n on the l e v e l o f p u b l i c
participation
throughout
the
planning

Often t h e p u b l i c i s confronted
w i t h a f i n i s h e d p l a n , and i t becomes
very d i f f i c u l t
i n d e e d f o r somebody
who has n o t p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e
ful l y
s c r e e n i ng
process
to
understand
the
reasons f o r
the
selection of
the f i n a l
project.
Such
considerations
are already
i n c o r p o r a t e d t o some e x t e n t
i n the
final
questions
of
Stage
3.
Q u e s t i o n 19--Who
made t h e
final
on
the
project?--and
dec i s i o n
Q u e s ti o n
20--Was
it
an
interdisciplinary planning effort?-except t h a t
i n t h e s e two q u e s t i o n s
t h e j u d g m e n t o f e a c h case s t u d y
r e s p o n d e n t i s c a l l e d o n so h e / s h e
can make recommendations o n how t h i s
s t a g e m i g h t have b e e n e x e c u t e d f o r
best resul ts.
Q u e s t i o n s 14 t o 18 a r e d i r e c t e d
toward t h e p r o c e s s o f s e t t i n g u p a
p r e l i m i n a r y model f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f
selecting
an
alternative
or
alternatives
t o be i n v e s t i g a t e d i n
d e t a i l i n S t a g e 4.
Q u e s ti o n
14--Were
many
alternatives
investigated?--is
a
question
whose
answer
obviously
r e q u i r e s a number l a r g e r t h a n one,
because u n l e s s t h e r e i s a c h o i c e a t
t h i s stage,
there
i s no d e c i s i o n
p r o c e s s , and no S t a g e 3 e x i s t s .
15--Wha t
was
the
Q u e s ti o n
hierarchical
structure
of
the
decision-making
process associated
w i t h p l a n n i r , g d u r i n g S t a g e 3 ? - - i s an
inquiry
i n t o the decision-making

-71-

p r o c e s s a d o p t e d b y t h e team
of
p l a n n e r s and t h e method by w h i c h i t
asserted
the
support
of
the
decision-makers.
I t i s generally
a g r e e d t h a t complex w a t e r r e s o u r c e s
p r o j e c t s must b e worked
on
by
e x p e r t s o f many d i f f e r e n t
kinds.
With
such v a r i e d
input,
a team
l e a d e r i s needed who i s a u t h o r i z e d
t o override
incompatible opinions
and whose
l e a d e r s h i p i s accepted.
The second p a r t o f t w o - p a r t Q u e s t i o n
16--What c o n s t r a i n t s were
imposed?
Who
imposed t h e n ? - - a d d r e s s e s
the
same c o n c e r n , w h i l e t h e f i r s t p a r t
i s d i r e c t e d t o w a r d p r o j e c t model
formulation,
w h i c h depends o n t h e
c o n s t r a i n t s under w h i c h t h e p l a n n e r
must work.
Q u e s t i o n 17--What models where
used?--required a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the
models f o r t h e S t a g e 3 c a l c u l a t i o n s .
These
calculations
a r e based on
r o u g h e s t i m a t e s o f i n p u t s and c o s t s :
t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s - a r e done
in just
s u f f i c i e n t enough d e t a i l t o p e r m i t
selection of the f i n a l
alternatives
i s more i m p o r t a n t ,
to
and,
what
permit estimation of project costs
and o t h e r consequences so t h a t a
f i n a l d e c i s i o n o n t h e p r o j e c t c a n be
obtained.
Because models c a n b e o f
very
different
degrees
of
re1 i a b i 1 i t y ,
Q u e s t i o n 18--To
what
e x t e n t were t h e s e models t e s t e d ,
etc.?--is
r e a l l y a q u e s t i o n about
t h e expected accuracy o f
Stage 3
calculations.

Planning Stage 4:
Development
of f i n a l project specifications
S t a g e 4 b e g i n s when p r e l i m i n a r y
dec i s i o n s
concerning
project
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s have been made,
the
funds f o r
f i n a l p l a n n i n g have been
made a v a i l a b l e , and a l l c o n s t r a i n t s
and o b j e c t i v e s
h a v e been d e t a i l e d .
A t t h i s p o i n t , t h e s t a g e has n o t y e t
been r e a c h e d f o r
doing
design,
a l t h o u g h t h e t y p e s o f s t r u c t u r e and
the design conditions
concerning
their
function w i t h i n the p r o j e c t
a r e known.
Stage 4 c o n s i s t s o f
quantifying
i n f o r m a t i o n on d e s i g n
discharges, operation rules,
etc.,
within
a system model
i n which
i n t e r a c t i o n s o f a l l system e l e m e n t s
as
well
as
trade-offs
among

objective functions
been q u a n t i f i e d .

(if

any)

have

OR methods
Q u e s t i o n 21--What
were u s e d ? - - c o n c e r n s t h e methods o f
analysis
by which t h e f i n a l p r o j e c t
and i t s o p e r a t i o n w e r e s p e c i f i e d .
The n e x t
two q u e s t i o n s ,
Question
22--Did
you
use
cost-benef i t
a n a l y s i s ? - - a n d Q u e s t i o n 23--Did
you
make a r i s k o r i m p a c t a n a l y s i s ? - - a d d
i m p o r t a n t d e t a i l s t o t h e response t o
Q u e s t i o n 21, because t h e s e t w o t y. p. e s
o f a n a l y s s y i e l d t h e most i m p o r t a n t
decision c r i t e r i a for
final
plan
se1 e c t i o n and p r o j e c t i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
decision.
The same
i s t r u e for
25--What
procedure
of
Q u e s tion
t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s was f o l l o w e d w i t h
respect
to
env i ronmenta 1
vs
econom i c
ssues?--except
that
this
question
i s more c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e
details of
the analysis
technique
than
with
presentation
of
the
results.
These a n a l y s e s , w h i c h w e r e
already
part of
Stage
3,
are
final
repeated
in
Stage 4 f o r
d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g . . They a r e p e r h a p s
made b y a g r o u p who have had more
d i r e c t access t o e n g i n e e r i n g c o s t
information.
Stage 4 must i n v o l v e
experienced engineers,
preferably
t h o s e who w i l l d o t h e f i n a l d e s i g n
i n S t a g e 5.

Q u e s ti o n
24--How
were
the
preferred
plans
selected?--is
d i r e c t e d a t f i n d i n g o u t how t h e
engineering experts interacted w i t h
nontechnical
persons
in
the
decision-making process w i t h i n t h e
constraints
of
previous decisions.
Q u e s t i o n 26--Did t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r
a c c e p t t h e optimum s o l u t i o n ? - - i s t h e
ultimate question of t h i s kind.
It
seeks t o d e t e r m i n e
whether
the
project
was
actual l y
designed
a c c o r d i n g t o some optimum ( p r e f e r r e d
s o l u t i o n ) i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e systems
a n a l y s t s recommendations or w h e t h e r
the f i n a l
d e s i g n proceeded a l o n g
1 ines.
Questio n
conventional
27--What was t h e p r o c e s s l e a d i n g t o
the
approval
of
the
final
plan--then,
i s the f i n a l step i n the
d e c i s i o n process
leading t o
the
final
go-ahead g i v e n b y p o l i t i c a l
b o d i e s , w h i c h w i l l u s u a l l y a l s o have
t o make a v a i l a b l e t h e f u n d s f o r
the
project.
T h i s q u e s t i o n and Q u e s t i o n

-72-

28--What
was t h e p r o c e s s o f f u n d i n g
the
final
plan?--are
different
aspects o f
t h e same q u e s t i o n and
m u s t b e answered t o g t h e r .
Quite a
different
kind
of
problem
is
a d d r e s s e d by Q u e s t i o n 29--Was
any
post-planning
evaluation
carried
out?
Usually the planner
of
a
project
receives
very
little
feedback from t h e o p e r a t o r s o f t h e
finished project.
Thus, v e r y l i t t l e
is
known
about
whether
water
resources
projects
have
real l y
performed according t o p l a n o r , i f
t h e y have n o t , w h i c h one ( o r more)
o f t h e aspects d e v i a t e d from t h e
d e s i g n assumptions.
Future designs
should be allowed t o b e n e f i t from
e x p e r i ences w i t h e x i s t i ng p r o j e c t s ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y i n assessing
t h e need
f o r data requirements.

Planning
design

Stage

5:

Project

The f i n a l q u e s t i o n r e l a t e d t o
S t a g e 5 was Q u e s t i o n 3O--Were t h e
design drawings p a r t o f
your j o b ?
T h i s q u e s t i o n was a s k e d i n o r d e r t o
f i n d o u t how c l o s e l y d e s i g n e r and
planner
were a s s o c i a t e d .
It
is
g e n e r a l l y assumed t h a t a p r o j e c t
s p e c i f i e d i n Stage
4
must
be
accepted
not
only
by
the
decision-maker,
b u t a l s o by the
d e s i g n e n g i n e e r , who i n t h e p a s t has
u s u a l l y been t h e same p e r s o n who d i d
the planning.
How d i d he o r
she
r e a c t t o h a v i n g a p l a n n e r t e l l him
what d e s i g n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s t o use?
I t
is
p o s s i b l e t h a t 'experience
o b t a i n e d d u r i n g t h e c a s e s t u d i e s may
b e u s e d t o i n c r e a s e c o o p e r a t i o n and
collaboration
b e t w e e n p l a n n e r and
des i g n e r

The p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s , as b r o k e n
down
into
thirty
pertinent
q u e s t i o n s , p r o v i d e s a g u i d e by which
p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g i n water resources
resources
may p r o c e e d .
I f a water
p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g team
i s able t o
it
answer a l l t h e s e q u e s t i o n s , t h e n
i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e e x p e r t s have done
a good j o b o f d r a w i n g u p a c o m p l e t e
plan.
Some o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e s w h i c h
t h e members o f t h e w o r k i n g g r o u p had
i n planning
i n t h e i r studies or

projects w i 1 1
next section.

be summar

6.4 Some conclusions

case studies

from

2 ed

n the

the

The
type
of
case
study
s u b m i t t e d b y members o f t h e w o r k i n g
g r o u p m i g h t have been t o some e x t e n t
d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e sample case s t u d y
chosen and t h e s p e c i f i c s o f
the
questionnaire.
However,
t h e case
s t u d i e s had a l r e a d y been s u b m i t t e d
b e f o r e t h e example was p r e p a r e d , s o
most members can be assumed t o have
been f r e e o f t h e s t r a i t j a c k e t
of
a
given
prior
example.
I t
is
t h e r e f o r e remarkable t h a t r e g i o n a l
I t
p r o j e c t s dominate so g r e a t l y .
seems t h a t t h i s p l a n n i n g l e v e l
is
particularly well
s u i t e d t o water
resources planning.
T h i s i s because
most r e g i o n a l s t u d i e s i n v o l v e r i v e r
b a s i n s and t h e r e f o r e o p e r a t e w i t h i n
natural
boundaries
and
largely
w i t h i n c o n s t r a i n t s and o b j e c t i v e s
s e t o n l y b y demands o n w a t e r .
On a
large scale,
for
example a t t h e
national
level
or
for a large
economic r e g i o n , w a t e r and i t s u s e
and d i s t r i b u t i o n t e n d t o become j u s t
one c o n c e r n among many o t h e r s .
This
means t h a t i n p r o j e c t s on a n a t i o n a l
scale,
o b j e c t i v e s and c o n f l i c t s may
n o t be
well
surface which w i l l
understood
by
water
resources
planners,
m o s t o f whom have
an
e n g i n e e r i n g b a c k g r o u n d and s e r v e i n
an e n g i n e e r i n g d e p a r t m e n t o f
an
agency o r u n i v e r s i t y .
On t h e o t h e r
hand, a s m a l l - s c a l e w a t e r
resources
p r o j e c t can degenerate i n t o merely
the
des i gn
of
hydraul ic
Such a p r o b l e m m i g h t
structure(s)
be q u i t e demanding f o r
a
des i gn
engineer b u t w i l l
involve rather
1 i m i t e d scope f o r p l a n n i n g .

The p r e f e r e n c e f o r case s t u d i e s
t h a t r e p o r t on p l a n n i n g r e g i o n a l
projects
is
undoubtedly
also
d i c t a t e d b y the f a c t t h a t , on t h i s
l e v e l , water concerns dominate t h e
of
a
water
decision
process
resources
project.
Under
such
conditions, there apparently are not
many o t h e r
conflicting
interests.
--usua 1 1 y
Once t h e "dec i s i on-maker"
a
ministry
of
a
high-level
government
agency
with
broad
'

-73-

powers--has
determined
that the
water resources o f a r e g i o n a r e t o
be d e v e l o p e d ,
the execution o f the
planning
process
is
left
to
engineers,
who
use
t h e i r best
j u d g m e n t i n d e c i d i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s and
s t r u c t u r e s t h a t w i l l accomplish t h e
objective
of
water
resources
development.
These e n g i n e e r s u s e
t h e b e s t methods a v a i l a b l e t o them:
the
projects
that
have
been
d e s c r i b e d i n t h e c a s e s t u d i e s have
m o s t l y b e e n c a s e s where t h e d e s i r e
t o do t h e j o b as w e l l
as p o s s i b l e
has
l e d i n a n a t u r a l way t o t h e u s e
o f a more o r
l e s s comprehensive
systems a p p r o a c h .
Although
many
regional
water
r e s o u r c e s systems
or
planned
have been d e v e l o p e d
without
t h e use o f systems a n a l y s i s
and o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h methods,
it
is
likely
that
t h e number o f
p r o j e c t s developed
i n t h i s manner
w i l l d e c r e a s e i n t h e f u t u r e as more
engineers
familiar
with
such
techniques are e n t r u s t e d w i t h water
resources planning.

I t i s r e m a r k a b l e t h a t one s t u d y
(Case S t u d y
10,
by
Becker
and
K o r z e r s k i ) shows t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e
t o develop a standardized o r almost
s t a n d a r d i z e d approach t o
solving
typical
water r e s o u r c e s problems i n
many d i f f e r e n t
sub-basins
of
a
river.
I n such a case,
systems
analysis
has
become
a
state-of-the-art
technique
which
supersedes
a1 1
previous
techniques--a s t a t e o f a f f a i r s t h a t
has
not
been
reached
i n many
countries.
I t l i k e l y requires a
degree o f acceptance o f
systems
techniques
which
can
only
be
obtained
if
t h e decision-makers
concerned
with
water
projects
thoroughly understand the p o t e n t i a l
and t h e l i m i t a t i o n s o f
t h e systems
approach
to
water
resources
p l a n n i ng.
V e r y l i t t l e h a s been s a i d a b o u t
t h e i n c l u s i o n o f o p e r a t i o n r u l e s or
schedules
i n t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n and
the specifications
derived
from
them.
T h i s i s u n f o r t u n a t e , because
i t i s one o f t h e g r e a t hopes o f
water
r e s o u r c e s p l a n n e r s t h a t , by
providing optimal
operation rules
or
other
water
for
reservoirs

distribution
systems,
they
can
materially
improve t h e u t i l i z a t i o n
of
water
resources.
Some
i n f o r m a t i o n would be d e s i r a b l e on
how w e l l t h e systems t h a t o p e r a t e o n
optimized
operation
rules
are
performing.
I t seems
likely that
o p e r a t o r s would s t e e r a s a f e c o u r s e
by u s i n g o p t i m i z e d r u l e s t h a t y i e l d
an optimum (on t h e a v e r a g e ) when n o
forecasting
of
f u t u r e events
is
included.
These c a n b e s u p p l e m e n t e d
by i n d i v i d u a l a d j u s t m e n t s b a s e d o n
experience w i t h the actual operation
of
t h e system,
thereby achieving
enough o p e r a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y t o b e
a b l e t o a d j u s t t o l a t e r changes o f
objectives or operation rules.
I t i s a l s o noteworthy t h a t
no
c a s e s t u d y makes r e f e r e n c e s t o an
o p e r a t i o n a l f o r e c a s t i n g model
that
p e r m i t s a d a p t i v e o p e r a t i o n based o n
real-time
h y d r o l o g i c events.
One
r e a s o n f o r t h i s may b e r e l a t e d t o
t h e f a c t t h a t these water resources
systems p e r f o r m f a i r l y w e l l w i t h o u t
of
future
real-time
forecasting
demands
or
supplies,
and
the
p e r f o r m a n c e can b e i m p r o v e d o n l y b y
f o r e c a s t i n g extreme events t h a t a r e
extremely rare.
An example o f
t h i s s t a t e of
a f f a i r s i s t h e f o r e c a s t i n g of f l o o d s
i n small catchments.
In principle,
t h e r e h a v e been a number o f r e s e a r c h
studies
that
show
that
an
improvement
i n f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n can
be
obtained
through
real-time
f o r e c a s t i n g s w i t h Kalman f i l t e r s o r
by means o f
s a t e l l i t e or
radar
evaluation of
rainfall.
However,
the operation
implementation of a
forecasting
system
in
a
small
catchment i s n o t c o s t e f f e c t i v e .
I t
i s not useful
t o i n s t a l l a system
t h a t w i l l be used o n l y o n c e e v e r y
f i f t y o r so y e a r s .
The f o r e c a s t i n g
a
p r o c e d u r e m u s t become p a r t o f
multipurpose forecasting a c t i v i t y ,
where
economic
feasibi 1 i t y
is
d i c t a t e d by o t h e r uses.
The c a s e s t u d i e s a l s o show v e r y
i n the
l i t t l e actual
optimization
sense o f d e t e r m i n i n g t h e o p t i m u m o f
an o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n .
Simulation
i s t h e m o s t common method u s e d f o r
p l a n n i n g , and t h e f i g u r e s o f m e r i t

-74-

are mostly p r o b a b i l i t i e s of meeting

I S
target
objectives.
Th i s
p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l expressed
i n the
method advocated
i n t h e case study
b y Becker
and K o z e r s k i
(see Case
10).
I t seems t h a t
it i s
Study
general l y
easier
for
the
to
base
his
"dec i s i on-maker"
d e c i s i o n s on a m u l t i t u d e o f such
f i g u r e s of m e r i t ,
w h i c h he t h e n
to
evaluates,
not
a c c o r d i ng
o b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i a b u t according t o
h i s subjective
impression o f t h e i r
relative merit.
Indeed, anyone who
has been i n v o l v e d i n t h e d e c i s i o n
process o f a water resources p r o j e c t
has f o u n d t h a t c o s t s
or
other
r a t i o n a l o b j e c t i v e s a r e v e r y seldom
used as c r i t e r i a f o r making t h e
f i n a l decision.
The d e c i d i n g f a c t o r
is political
acceptance,
which
is
relative
b a s e d on p e r c e p t i o n s o f
m e r i t as compared w i t h o t h e r u s e s o f
p u b l i c funds.
Even i n c a s e s where
cost-benefit
or
similar
economic
c r i t e r i a play a r o l e i n the decision
process
( i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y funded
p r o j e c t s , f o r example), o p t i m i z a t i o n
i s r a r e l y e v e r employed because o f
the
difficulty
of
expressing
d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t i v e s i n commensurate
terms.
ana 1 y s i s
Mu1 t io b j e c t i v e
methods d e v e l o p e d o v e r t h e p a s t two
decades may overcome t h i s p r o b l e m i n
a way
that
i s acceptable
t o the
d e c i s i o n makers.
As a f i n a l o b s e r v a t i o n , m o s t o f
t h e s t u d i e s included here
involved
n o t o n l y water
resources planning
s t a f f f r o m a n agency o f a c o n s u l t i n g
f i r m , b u t t h e y were a l s o accompanied
by u n i v e r s i t y
teams,
which
were
o f t e n r e s e a r c h teams.
I t i s evident
that
t h r o u g h r e s e a r c h and s t u d y o f
the
international
literature,
the
a d v a n t a g e s o f systems a n a l y s i s have
become a p p a r e n t t o academics e a r l i e r
than
t o other planners--in
part

certainly
because
of
thei r
i n f o r m a t i o n advantage,
but i n part
p r o b a b l y a l s o because academics c a n
spend more t i m e
i n f o l l o w i n g new
approaches t h a n p r o f e s s i o n a l s ,
who
usually
work
under
very t i g h t
monetary o r t i m e c o n s t r a i n t s .
This
situation
is
typical
for
a
developing f i e l d .
The academic w i l l
t e n d t o s i m p l i f y p r o b l e m s t o make
them f i t t h e methods o f s o l u t i o n
t h a t he knows; when he works w i t h a
p r a c t i t i o n e r , he w i l l f i n d t h e f l a w s
and gaps
i n h i s knowledge, w h i c h
w i l l prompt h i m t o f u r t h e r d e v e l o p
and
adjust
his
methods.
This
process o f feedback
and a d j u s t m e n t
continues
until
either
t h e new
methods become t o o c o m p l i c a t e d ,
at
which
point
they
find a final
r e s t i n g p l a c e i n t h e pages o f
a
p r o f e s s i o n a l j o u r n a l , or u n t i l t h e y
have been f o r g e d
i n t o a generally
a c c e p t a b l e t o o l t h a t becomes p a r t o f
t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l know-how.
I t seems
t h a t up t o now i n t h e f i e l d o f w a t e r
resources,
mostly
s imu 1 a t i o n
t e c h n i q u e s have r e a c h e d t h e l a t t e r
stage.
Only t i m e w i l l t e l l , a f t e r a
g r e a t deal
o f cooperative e f f o r t
involving universities,
government
a g e n c i e s , and c o n s u l t i n g f i r m s ,
if
more s o p h i s t i c a t e d d e c i s i o n m o d e l s
w i 1 1 be s u i t a b l e f o r g e n e r a l p r o j e c t
planning.
The c u r r e n t s t a t e o f a f f a i r s
might
be summarized as f o l l o w s .
Many o f t h e Unesco member c o u n t r i e s
have teams o f p e o p l e who keep t r y i n g
to
improve t h e p l a n n i n g methods f o r
water resources p r o j e c t s .
I f this
book h e l p s t o e n c o u r a g e them t o
c o n t i n u e t h e i r work
and see t h e i r
p r o j e c t as p a r t o f an
international
at
understanding
and
effort
improving t h e p l a n n i n g process f o r
water resources p r o j e c t s ,
it w i l l
have s e r v e d i t s p u r p o s e .

Appendix 1: The questionnaire

T h i s appendi x c o n t a i n s a1 1
the
q u e s t i o n s t h a t w e r e used t o o u t l i n e
and g i v e r e g u l a r i t y t o t h e c a s e
that follow.
They
are
studies
that
grouped
under
head i ngs
represent the f i v e planning stages
o u t l i n e d i n Chapter 1 .

7.

Were o n l y e x i s t i n g d a t a u s e d ?
I f n o t , w h a t methods were u s e d
t o g e t new d a t a :
synthetic
g e n e r a t i o n ? new measurements?
Were measurements
continued
during
the planning stage?
during the construction?

Planning Stage 1: Project

initiation and preliminary planning

8.

Were OR t e c h n i q u e s u s e d t o
d e c i d e o n t h e method o f d a t a
c o l l e c t i o n and l e n g t h o f d a t a ?

9.

Was a p r o g r a m s e t up t o a s s e s s
the data
t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of
b a s e u s e d ? Who managed such a
program?

10.

Were any s p e c i a l methods

t o analyze the data?

1.

Was t h e p r o j e c t
i n i t i a t e d on
the
basis
of a long-term
program?
Discuss b r i e f l y .

2.

What l e v e l and t y p e o f s k i l l e d
p e r s o n n e l and a g e n c i e s were
involved i n the various stages
o f t h e p l a n n i n g process?
Was
the
public
involved,
in
p a r t i c u l a r i n the formulation
of project objectives?

3.

What d e c i s i o n
employed
for
in i t i a t i o n ?

4.

What c o n s t r a i n t s were posed?

What
constraints
posed t h e
g r e a t e s t p r o b l e m ? Who imposed
them? Was
there willingness
t o discuss these c o n s t r a i n t s ?

5.

D i d a l l e x p e r t s a g r e e on t h e
methods t o be employed? How
was
an
agreement
brought
about?
(Decision
by
decision-makers
siding
with
one o f t h e o p i n i o n s ? D e c i s i o n
by a p l a n n i n g bureau?)

6.

Planning Stage 3: Formulation and

screening of project alternatives
11.

What r e s o u r c e s w e r e u s e d
in
t h i s phase o f
the planning
process,
e.g.,
time,
funds,
computers,
f a c i l i t i e s , . and
manpower?

12.

What
type o f
institutional
s u p p o r t was p r o v i d e d d u r i n g
the
planning
process,
its
s o u r c e s , and i t s i m p a c t s ?

13.

To what e x t e n t d i d t h e p u b l i c
participate
i n the planning
and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s ?

14.

many
alternatives
Were
investigated?
I n what d e t a i l ?
Who
decided
on
the
alternatives
to
be
investigated?

15.

What was
the
hierarchical
of
the
structure
decision-making
process
associated w i t h
the planning
o f t h e case s t u d y discussed?
Who made what d e c i s i o n s ? How
was
conf 1 ic t
resolution
ach i eved? How w e r e t r a d e - o f f S
assessed-explicitly?
Implicitly?

c r i t e r i a were
the
project

Planning Stage 2: Data

collection and processing
What d a t a w e r e used i n t e r m s
of
type,
scope,
frequency,
spatial
and
temporal
distribution,
etc.?
P 1 ease
a d d r e s s b o t h h y d r o l o g i c a l and
nonhydrological data
(e.g.,
demographical, socio-economic) .

used

-76-

16.

What c o n s t r a i n t s were imposed?

I n your
o p i n i o n were
they
reasonable?
A c c e p t a b l e ? Who
imposed them? How h a r d w e r e
they:
C o u l d t h e y be r e l a x e d
BY
by
discussion?
decision-makers?

23.

risk
a
you
make
y
s
iS?
ana
analysis/impact
Why:
was
i t r e q u i r e d by a
dec i s i on-maker , o r by whom?
What d i d you l e a r n f r o m t ?

Did

24.

How w e r e t h e p r e f e r r e d p l a n s
s e l e c t e d ? How w e r e t r a d e - o f f s
assessed?
Were
spec i f i c
trade-offs
generated?
Was a
o p t i m iz a t ion
mu1 t i o b j e c t i ve
methodology
used?
How
i n v o l v e d were d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
(at t h e various
levels)
in
t h i s s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s ? What
conclusions
and
recommendations c a n you s h a r e ?

17.

What
simulation/analytical
m o d e l s d i d you u s e and f o r
what
p u r p o s e ? Which o f t h e s e
mode 1 s
were
d e v e 1 oped
elsewhere
and
which
were
d e v e l o p e d d u r i n g and f o r t h e
project?

18.

To w h a t e x t e n t were
these
models
tested,
calibrated,
v e r i f i e d , and m o d i f i e d ?

25.

What was
t h e r o l e of
the
experts,
the
techn i ca 1
decision-makers,
and
the
public
i n the f i n a l selection
of the f i n a l p l a n ?

What p r o c e d u r e o f
trade-off
a n a l y s i s was f o l l o w e d
with
respect
to
env i ronmenta 1
concerns
vs.
econom i c
c o n c e r n s and o b j e c t i v e s ?

26.

Did the decision-maker

accept
an
" o p t i ma 1 I '
sol u t ion
g e n e r a t e d by t h e m o d e l s ?
Did
he a c c e p t your a p p r o a c h o r was

19.

20.

Was
i t an
interdisciplinary
p l a n n i n g e f f o r t ? Was t h e m i x
a p p r o p r i a t e ? What c o n c l u s i o n s
and r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s can you
share?

it
supplemented
by
" c o n v e n t i ona 1 I ' i n f orma t i o n ?

27.

What was t h e p r o c e s s l e a d i n g
t o t h e approval o f the f i n a l
plan?

28.

What was
the
process
funding the f i n a l plan?

29.

Was
any
post-planning
evaluation carried out?

Planning Stage 4: Development

of final project specifications
21.

22.

What OR methods were u s e d ?

F o r e a c h method:
d i d you u s e
existing
models
for
your
project?
D i d y o u u s e new
developments,
modifications?
Your own? Where d i d you g e t
them f r o m ?
D i d you f i n d t h e
1 i t e r a t u r e u s e f u l ? Which book
or
p a p e r was o f
particular
value?
D i d you a d j u s t
the
p r o b l e m t o f i t t h e m o d e l ? Was
t h e model
"optimized"?
Did
y o u e x p l o r e many
different
methods?
How many? How d i d
y o u d e c i d e on t h e one you
u s e d ? Would you use i t a g a i n ?
H o w much t i m e d i d you spend c n
this?
D i d y o u make a c o s t - b e n e f i t
analysis?
What d i d you l e a r n
f r o m i t ? Would you recommend
doing t h a t again?

Planning Stage 5:
design
30.

of

Project

Were t h e d r a w i n g s p a r t o f y o u r
j o b ? Who d i d t h e m ? - - a n o t h e r
group,
somebody
in
your
o f f i c e ? Could you r e l a t e t h e
systems
analysis
results
to
the designer?

Appendix 11: Case studies

T h i s appendix c o n s i s t s o f
ten
case s t u d i e s .
They a r e a r r a n g e d i n
alphabetical
order,
with
two
exceptions.
Case Study
1,
E.J.
P l a t e , was w r i t t e n t o p r o v i d e a n
example of how t o s t r u c t u r e t h e c a s e
studies
for
t h i s appendix.
This
example was
s e n t t o a l l members o f
t h e W o r k i n g Group, and t o t h e o t h e r
contributors.
Case Study 10,

Case Study
1

by

Authors

A.

Becker

and D.
K o z e r s k i , was n o t s t r u c t u r e d
a c c o r d i n g t o t h e example o f Case
I t is a brief description
Study 1.
of
a general
p r o c e d u r e based o n
simulation
methods
for
planning
water
resources p r o j e c t s ,
and
it
supplements t h e p r o c e s s e x p r e s s e d i n
Rather
than
C h a p t e r s 1 t o 5.
i n t e g r a t i n g t h i s method i n t o t h e
t e x t , t h e Ed i t o r i a 1 Board d e c i d e d t o
leave
the
paper
as a g e n e r a l
contribution t o the overall subject.

Title

E. J . P1a t e

P l a n n i n g a System f o r F l o o d P r o t e c t i o n R e s e r v o i r s
f o r t h e S u l m Catchment i n t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c
o f Germany

D.

Development o f Water S u p p l y Schemes i n t h e E a s t e r n

Negev, I s r a e l :
General D e s c r i p t i o n

Alkan

A.H.M.Bresser

Long Term I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n i n g o f t h e D r i n k i n g
Water S u p p l y i n t h e P r o v i n c e o f S o u t h H o l l a n d
(The N e t h e r 1 ands) : I ODZH

Y.Y.Haimes
K . Sung
L.T.Crook
D.Gregorka

P o s t E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e P l a n n i n g P r o c e s s i n t h e Maumee
R i v e r B a s i n Level-B Study

D.T.Howe1 1

The P1 ann i ng P r o c e s s i n t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n Ade 1 a i d e

Water R e s o u r c e s S t u d y o f June 1978

Z.Kaczmarek
J K i nd 1 e r

Post E v a l u a t i o n o f t h e P l a n n i n g Process i n t h e
V i s t u l a R i v e r Basin, Poland

D. R o s b j e r g

Development o f a Water R e s o u r c e s Management Model

f o r t h e Susaa Catchment i n Denmark

U.Shami r

Management o f

P.Stegaroi u
I .Dima
R.Amaftiesei
V . V i San

P r o m o t i o n o f M u l t i p u r p o s e Water Management
F a c i l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare B a s i n

10

A . Becker
D. Kozerski

A p p l i c a t i o n o f S i m u l a t i o n T e c h n i q u e s i n Water R e s o u r c e s
P l a n n i n g and Management i n t h e German D e m o c r a t i c
Republ i c

I s r a e l ' s Water R e s o u r c e s

a
U

U
U

VI

.
l

D
0

$
r c u

c
-VI

-s
-(U

mLn

0
c
r m

D
L

01

*
a

C L

n
L

E= E

C L

EH E -2
U

mIn

-a

CI

?C

U-

D
c.

2
b

c
r

C - 0

m 3 >

- 1 -

L-

V C

W O

-a

c0-m
u N
m-E
3E-

-0

-EP

U -

-n

(U
c

-n

U
0
L

4-

a
v
O C
0 0

- c

U-

>

OK

La
am
aa

mm

L L

VI

ca
O L
- U

O L

- J

- 0
m1

>

VI
L

*>

22

-e

-c
m-

0-"

-78-

ay

am-

- V I

--

U1

m a
1 0 1
a - 1
3
-vCLVI
U
-v-maa
c
c>- - 4 - a
>lnInD
>
O a Dn 3 k
ocom
w m n v ~ v , "I+--

-.-.WO

KEmD

L u -

z 4 - V I
- a
LO. v
a K > C
> Y O U
1DD

mm

K Q

.
l

m-

riu-m

>mm>

.-my,

In

ZU-

.U

mca

>a

-4-

(34

O D

C O D
3 D m

e v
- c

01
-D
DJ

aLn

LLEO

4- v)

aom
ca
mamo

L J D

$f

aL

D O

O m

C O

K-

inn

be-

E:

kb
V C

m-

YY

Fi

cn

-Ln

-c

OW

ID

L L

n-

r u
O C
m

mo
rr
mm
va
aK

VI - m
a aVU~ -

L J m L

m --U
c c 3 c
--rem
VI m VIm-o
m n>n

P O

-70,

m
r c
vo
a-

c
0

s
D

k!

VI

In

m
m

r
0-

r m
3In

- L

UU

c
m

5
a
z-a
n m
OL

JVI
LOU
L >

I O - r m a V I

In

ma03

BKUU

aa
ma

4-0

32

a-v
>- c
->a

>

4-

VI

m
hl

8
c

(U
4-

n
I

U
01

OE
L-

QJ
VI

D -

8 E"

--K
U-U

PLANNING A SYSTEM OF FLOOD PROTECTION RESERVOIRS IN

THE SULM CATCHMENT IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY

Professor Erich J. Plate (PSC)

lnstitut Wasserbau Ill an der
Universitat Karlsruhe
Kaiserstrasse 12
75 Karlsruhe 1
Federal Republic o f Germany

1.

Introduction

The
industrialization
of
Germany
has
brought
urban
d e v e l o p m e n t s and
factories
into
r i v e r f l o o d p l a i n s which i n o l d e r
days were f l o o d e d
regularly
by
r i v e r s s w o l l e n f r o m heavy summer
rains or
early
s p r i n g snow m e l t .
The t r a d i t i o n a l
method o f
flood
proofing consisted of r i v e r t r a i n i n g
and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f f l o o d l e v e e s measures w h i c h t e n d t o a l l e v i a t e t h e
f l o o d hazard i n t h e protected r e g i o n
b u t i n c r e a s e m a g n i t u d e and s h o r t e n
concentration time of
the floods
downstream.
The h y d r o l o g i c a l d e s i g n
information
for
these f l o o d s
is
o b t a i n e d i n a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d manner
by extreme v a l u e a n a l y s i s o f
the
e x t r e m e f l o o d peaks, o f t e n u s i n g t h e
1 1 1 recommended b y t h e
procedure
German Water
Resources A s s o c i a t i o n
(DVWK),
which
i s based
on
the
Ill
Pearson I l l and Log Pearson
curves.
By
means o f h y d r a u l i c
calculations
flood
peaks
are
converted
i n t o s t a g e s f o r t h e newly
designed cross s e c t i o n s .
The c r o s s
sections
usually
are
obtained
combining experience w i t h e m p i r i c a l
design considerations,
although a
model has been d e v e l o p e d by Seus and
Bauch i n w h i c h L P
i s employed t o
y i e l d a combination o f cross section
geometry and l e v e e h e i g h t
which
r e q u i r e s a minimum c o s t . The model

i n 121 and i t
has been d e s c r i b e d
has b e e n a p p l i e d t o some B a v a r i a n
r i v e r s b y the authors.
Recent
practice
has
been
to
d e s i g n a system o f f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n
reservoirs,
b y means o f w h i c h t h e
f l o o d s f r o m t h e upper c a t c h m e n t s a r e
r e t a i n e d and r e l e a s e d a f t e r
the
f l o o d s f r o m t h e lower reaches have
receded.
The p r a c t i c e
has
the
advantage
that
apart
from t h e
widening o f
narrow s e c t i o n s
and
c h a n n e l improvements t h e l o w e r p a r t s
of
the r i v e r s are kept f r e e o f
eng i n e e r i ng
structures,
thus
p r e s e r v i n g them i n t h e i r
natural
state
while
at
t h e same t i m e
obtaining flood protection for
the
downstream
areas.
S i nce
t h is
p r a c t i c e o f f l o o d p r o o f i n g i s used
i n West Germany,
quite extensively
i t i s u s e f u l t o p r e s e n t a case s t u d y
IHP
o n i t as a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e
as p a r t o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e s o f Unesco
member
countries w i t h operations
r e s e a r c h methods, i n s p i t e of
the
fact
that
systems a n a l y s i s and OR
methods a r e used o n l y m a r g i n a 1 Y .
s
the
The s y s t e m c o n s i d e r e d
1
.
It
S u l m c a t c h m e n t shown i n F i g .
w
h
i
c
h
is typical
o f many s y s t e m
have b e e n d e s i g n e d and c o n s t r u c t e d
i n t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany
it
i s not
i n r e c e n t years,
but
t y p i c a l i n these respects:
first,

..

8
c

-80-

t h e a r e a has been e x c e p t i o n a l l y w e l l
equipped w i t h g a g i n g s t a t i o n s f o r
r u n o f f and f o r r a i n f a l l ,
permitting
f r i n g e s t u d i e s on t h e e f f e c t o f
network d e n s i t y , r e g i o n a l i z a t i o n o f
unit
hydrographs
etc.
which
wi 11
1 ead
to
eventually
recommendations f o r p r o c e d u r e s t o be
t o be a p p l i e d i n f u t u r e systems.
S e c o n d l y , a r e s e a r c h team was
a v a i l a b l e ( I n s t i t u t Wasserbau I l l o f
t h e U n i v e r s i t y of
K a r l s r u h e , IWK)
w h i c h was
not only
interested i n
s o l v i n g t h e p r o b l e m a t hand b u t a l s o
i n u s i n g t h e data o f the study area
f o r r e s e a r c h p u r p o s e s , so t h a t t h e
cost of
t h e d a t a e v a l u a t i o n was
covered i n p a r t f r o m research funds.
Thirdly,
t h e r e s e a r c h team o f t h e
IWK was i n t e r e s t e d
i n a p p l y i n g OR
techniques
t o o b t a i n an o p t i m a l
solution,
although
traditionally
this
problem
is
solved
by
e n g i n e e r i n g j u d g e m e n t and consensus
o f t h e communities i n v o l v e d w i t h o u t
f o r m a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f OR t e c h n i q u e s .
A common
feature
of
most
Germany f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n schemes i s
that
the
sites
available
for
building flood protection reservoirs
a r e few,
limited
in
size,
and
l o c a t e d u s u a l l y so f a r u p s t r e a m t h a t
only a small p a r t o f the r u n o f f from
t h e c a t c h m e n t can b e r e t a i n e d b y t h e
basin.
T h e r e f o r e , t h e p r o b l e m posed
usually
is
this:
what
i s the
p r o b a b i l i t y o f occurrence o f
the
maximum f l o o d t h a t t h e s y s t e m c a n
protect against,
and what
i s the
minimum size of the reservoirs a t
t h e p o s s i b l e l o c a t i o n s t o accomplish
this
protection.
Usually
this
I S
constrained
by
p r o b 1 em
innumerable l o c a l c o n d i t i o n s r a n g i n g
from the d e s i r e o f the population o f
one v i l l a g e t o b e p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t
a 100 y e a r
f l o o d t o that o f other
v i l l a g e s who w o u l d l i k e t o have a
v e r y s m a l l o r no r e s e r v o i r so as t o
be a b l e t o use t h e a r e a f o r
other
purposes.
Also, f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n by
reservoirs
can b e supplemented b y
r i v e r t r a i n i n g measures.
I n order
to
illustrate
the
p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s f o r such a s y s t e m ,
the questions of
our questionnaire
w i l l b e answered i n sequence.

2.

Planning Stage 1:
Project
I n i t i a t i o n a n d P r e l i m i n a r y Planning

Question 1:
The
project
was
initiated
through
two
developments:
the
p r o v i s i o n o f t h e l e g a l framework f o r
f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n measures t h r o u g h
s t a t e and
federal
laws,
which
the
financial
regu1a t e
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and t h e p r o c e d u r e f o r
s e t t i n g up f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n systems.
In
particular
t h e laws r e q u i r e
s e t t i n g up a d i s t r i c t formed by t h e
p r o f i t i n g communities,
which must
pay 30% o f t h e c o s t , w h i l e t h e r e s t
o f t h e c o s t i s c o v e r e d by s t a t e and
f e d e r a l sources, s u b j e c t t o approval
by t h e S t a t e P a r l i a m e n t .
In this
sense, t h e p r o j e c t i s p a r t o f a l o n g
range p l a n t o p r o t e c t a l l
citizens
of
the
country against natural
disaster.
The second s t e p was t a k e n
a f t e r a s e v e r e f l o o d i n 1970 c a u s e d
e x t e n s i v e damage i n t h e c i t y o f
Neckarsulm.

A flood protection
district
(FPD)
was
formed,
w h i c h agreed t o
d i s t r i b u t e the cost according t o a
c o s t s h a r i n g p l a n worked o u t o n t h e
basis of
share o f b e n e f i t s
and
financial
c a p a b i l i t y and n e g o t i a t e d
by t h e l o c a l county a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s .
The d i s t r i c t i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e
s t a t e water
administration
(SWA)
worked
out
a preliminary plan,
setting aside possible sites,
and
submitted
i t f o r approval
t o the
State L e g i s l a t u r e which authorized
t h e p l a n n i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e
system,
a l l o w i n g a c e r t a i n budget
p e r year f o r
S t a t e s u p p o r t - and
thus,
s i n c e F e d e r a l S u p p o r t i s on a
c o s t s h a r i n g percentage,
also for
Federal
funding.
W i t h t h e green
l i g h t t h u s g i v e n p l a n n i n g proceeded
in
earnest,
resulting
in
the
hydrological
calculations
and t h e
p l a n n i n g recommendations o f t h e IWK.

Question 2:
The s t a t e o f
Baden-Wurttemberg
m a i n t a i n s a competent s t a f f w i t h i n
t h e a r e a b u r e a u o f t h e SWA c a p a b l e
al 1
technical
and
of
hand1 i n g
administrative
tasks.
The p u b l i c
was i n v o l v e d , t h r o u g h t h e community

councils,
i n t h e s e t t i n g up o f t h e
FPD.
The p u b l i c was
thus
involved
indirectly.

Question 3:
D e c i s i o n c r i t e r i a were:
what
was i n t e r p r e t e d as t h e d e s i r e o f t h e
people
to
be
protected,
which
and
s u r f a c e d a f t e r t h e 1970 f l o o d ,
the
a v a i l a b i l i t y of
funds.
But
p e r h a p s t h e d e c i d i n g f a c t o r was t h a t
t h e Audi-NSU w o r k s ,
which
i n 1970
had s u f f e r e d a f l o o d damage o f a b o u t
10 M i l l .
DM, t h r e a t e n e d t o move t o
another l o c a t i o n unless i t s s i t e
in
Neckarsulm
was p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t
floods similar t o the
I970 f l o o d .
S i n c e o n e r e s e r v o i r ( B r e i t e n a u , see
Fig.
1 ) was l a r g e enough t o c o n t a i n
more t h a n t h e 100 y e a r f l o o d o f
the
upstream r e g i o n ,
s t o r a g e i n i t was
s e t a s i d e f o r low f l o w augmentation
f o r e x c e p t i o n a l l y d r y years, which
d u r i n g o r d i n a r y y e a r s a l l o w e d some
u t i l i z a t i o n for recreation.

Question 4:
The c o n s t r a i n t s w e r e s e t b y t h e
land a v a i l a b l e f o r
t h e system,
by
the
fact
that
due
to
other
of
activities
( r e c u l t i v a t i on
vineyards
i n t h e a r e a ) one o f t h e
r e s e r v o i r s had t o b e s t a r t e d b e f o r e
planning
was
completed,
two
reservoirs
i n t h e r i v e r had a l r e a d y
1970, and
been c o n s t r u c t e d b e f o r e
f u n d s were a v a i l a b l e
t o s t a r t the
c o n s t r u c t i o n o f one b a s i n
right
away.
The
planner
(the
local
had t o
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e SWA)
make p r e l i m i n a r y d e c i s i o n s w i t h o u t
t h e b e n e f i t o f a sound h y d r o l o g i c a l
basis.

Question 5:
The m a i n e x p e r t s o n t h e p r o j e c t
were:
the water
reservoir
planner
and h y d r o l o g i c a n a l y s t ,
i.e.
the
I W K , and t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f
the
SWA,
in
particular
the
local
representative,
who a l s o p r o v i d e d
the
l i a i s o n t o the higher echelons
and t o t h e FPD.
A l l
technical
decisions
and m o d e l s w e r e d i s c u s s e d
w i t h h i m and
occasionally
with
members
of
the
r e g i ona 1
administration.
According
t o the

administrative structure of the

the
decision-maker
on t e c h n
aspects i s the local representat
He f u l l y c o o p e r a t e d and a c c e p t e d
r e s u l t s of t h e planning hydrolog

SWA
ca 1
ve.
the
st.

3.
Planning Stage 2:
Data
Collection and Processing
Question 6:
The d a t a b a s e f o r
the study
consisted o f
hydrological
d a t a on
r a i n f a l l ( r a i n f a l l gages w i t h d a i l y
totals
measured
everyday,
and
r e c o r d i n g gages) and r u n o f f
(runoff
gages a t t h e l o c a t i o n s shown i n F i g .
1).
The r a i n f a l l gages w i t h roman
7
n u m e r a l s had been o b s e r v e d f o r
years,
but
long term records from
1950
-1977
were
available
at
s t a t i o n s n e a r t h e Sulm a r e a and were
used t o o b t a i n l o n g t e r m s t a t i s t i c s .
For l o n g t e r m r u n o f f s t a t i s t i c s t h e
r u n o f f gage a t N e c k a r s u l m was used
f o r t h e p e r i o d 1956 - 1977.

A l l y e a r s o f t h e r e c o r d s were
used
to
obtain
extreme
value
statistics,
and t o i d e n t i f y f l o o d s
and shapes o f f l o o d waves.
The
network d e n s i t y w i t h
18 raingages
for
110 km 2 was f a r l a r g e r t h a n
a v e r a g e , because a f t e r t h e f l o o d o f
1970 t h e a r e a had been made a s t u d y
area o f the m i n i s t r y responsible f o r
t h e water a d m i n i s t r a t i o n .
It is
more u s u a l t o have r a i n gages one
e v e r y 100 t o 500 km 2 .
Also, t h e
r u n o f f gages o n t h e s m a l l c r e e k s a r e
an
unusual
feature,
but
they
permitted t o regionalize runoff u n i t
h y d r o g r p h s , and t h e d a t a have been
used
(by u s )
t o work o u t more
general
rainfall-runoff
relations.
Economic d a t a were n o t r e q u i r e d ,
except for the cost o f construction
for
the reservoirs.
The v e r y dense
n e t w o r k o f gages w a s s e t up w i t h t h e
additional
purpose
of
yielding
i n f o r m a t i o n on the r e q u i r e d network
d e n s i t y f o r s t u d i e s o f t h e same k i n d
as t h e one r e p o r t e d on.

Question 7:
For f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n s t u d i e s
f l o o d waves o f
c e r t a i n exceedance
probabi 1 i t ies
are
requ i red.
Naturally,
such d a t a had t o
be

o b t a i n e d from t h e basic d a t a by
extreme
value
analysis
of
the
r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f d a t a .
The f l o o d
waves
were
obtained
by
using
r a i n f a l l waves c a l i b r a t e d a g a i n s t
measured waves,
whose
area
was
f rom
a
genera 1 i zed
o b t a i ned
depth-area-duration
curve
for
r a i n f a l l s o f d i f f e r e n t exceedance
probabi 1 i t i e s
of
the
area's
A
constant
runoff
subregions.
c o e f f i c i e n t was u s e d
which
was
determined from a coaxial-diagram o f
the
area,
and
a
regionalized
u n i t - h y d r o g r a p h was used t o o b t a i n
the
runoff
hydrograph.
When
possible,
t h e extreme v a l u e o f t h e
calculated runoff
hydrograph
was
checked a g a i n s t t h e e x t r e m e v a l u e o f
t h e measured r u n o f f o f
t h e same
exceedance
probability
and
the
coaxial-diagram
was
(slightly)
a d j u s t e d t o i m p r o v e agreement.
The
data c o l l e c t i o n continued throughout
t h e p l a n n i n g s t a g e , and f l o o d s were
used
t o v e r i f y u n i t hydrographs
(usually
with
little
need
of
adjustment), i n p a r t i c u l a r
a major
flood
i n 1978 w h i c h p r o v e d t o b e a n
e v e n t whose p r o b a b i l i t y o f
being
exceeded was a b o u t o n c e i n 50 y e a r s .

Question 8:
No OR t e c h n i q u e s were u s e d t o
determine
the
method
of
data
collection,
but the unusually large
amount o f a v a i l a b l e d a t a t r i g g e r e d a
number o f s t u d i e s :
o n t h e optimum
contro1
of
flood
protection
reservoirs
131, on t h e d e n s i t y o f
networks
required
for
flood
p r o t e c t i o n work, on t h e accuracy o f
r a i n f a l l d e t e r m i n a t i o n from networks
of different density.
However, t h e
study
i t s e l f d i d n o t r e q u i r e OR
techniques
i n t h e data
analysis
stage
other
t h a n l e a s t squares
a n a l y s e s used f o r c u r v e f i t t i n g s .

Question 9:
The o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n o f
the
study d i d n o t r e q u i r e c r i t e r i a data.
In particular,
d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and
o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n o f t h e s t u d y were
not coordinated.
As has been s t a t e d
before:
there e x i s t i n
Germany
networks
of
r a i n f a l l and r u n o f f
gages w h i c h a r e o p e r a t e d by t h e

M e t e o r o l o g i c a l S e r v i c e and t h e s t a t e
Water A u t h o r i t i e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
I t
m i g h t be i n t e r e s t i n g t o p o n d e r
the
history
of
these
networks :
c e r t a i n l y t h e i r o r i g i n a t o r s had no
n o t i o n o f t h e purposes f o r which t h e
d a t a b a s i s i s b e i n g used t o d a y .

Question 70:
The p r o j e c t s e r v e d t o d e v e l o p a
hydrological
method
of
flood
calculations
for
mu 1 t i s it e
reservoirs.
The method c o n s i s t e d o f
adapting
an a r e a r a i n f a l l - r u n o f f
model t o t h e S u l m a r e a , by u s i n g t h e
unit
hydrographs
regionalized
d e s c r i b e d above f o r
each o f
the
r e s e r v o i r s w h i c h were
l o c a t e d on
tributaries,
and b y u s i n g l i n e a r
flood routing for
the r i v e r parts
between t h e r e s e r v o i r s on t h e main
river.
M o d e l s o f t h i s k i n d had b e e n
developed
i n d i f f e r e n t parts of the
FGR (Schultz
141, B o g a r d i e t a l .
151, S c h r o e d e r and E u l e r 161.

Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation and Screening of Project
Alternatives

4.

The p r o j e c t a l t e r n a t i v e s
in
t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c a s e were g i v e n by
d if f erent
combinations
of
reservoirs,
with
only reservoir
B r e i t e n a u used a l s o f o r
low f l o w
was
augmentation.
Cons i d e r a t i o n
g i v e n t o use t h e low f l o w s t o r a g e
f o r r e c r e a t i o n a l purposes,
although
t h e o p i n i o n s o n t h i s were m i x e d .
A l t h o u g h i t was
realized that
the
area would b e n e f i t economically t o
some e x t e n t , due t o t h e p u r c h a s i n g
power o f v i s i t o r s , t h e r e were f e a r s ,
experiences i n nearby
born out of
regions,
that
t h e v i s i t o r s would
p l a c e a burden on t h e environment,
and t h a t t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f p a r k i n g
zones, beaches, and t h e l i k e w o u l d
c o s t more t h a n w o u l d be g a i n e d by
the region i n particular
since
m o s t v i s i t o r s w o u l d come f r o m n e a r b y
l a r g e c i t i e s l o c a t e d o u t s i d e of t h e
region.
However,
because
i t was
f e l t that
t h e r e s e r v o i r would be
used
recreationally
anyway,
the
to
establish
d e c i s i o n was made,
recreational
facilities
at
the
But no d e t a i l e d b e n e f i t - c o s t
lakes.
analysis
or
any o t h e r
planning

i n s t r u m e n t was u s e d t o s u p p o r t
the
decision.
The answers t o p e r t i n e n t
questions of t h i s section refer
to
the
alternative
combinations of
reservoirs only.

Questions 7 7 and 12.

The
alternatives
were
investigated by the h y d r o l o g i s t s o f
the University o f
Karlsruhe.
In
p a r t supported by s t a t e funds f o r
t h e p r o j e c t , and p a r t l y b y r e s e a r c h
money
from
the
German S c i e n c e
Associations,
a number o f
staff
members w o r k e d o u t t h e p r o g r a m s .
A l l
i n a l l , a t o t a l o f a b o u t 6 man
y e a r s were u s e d ,
o f which o n l y a
fraction of
a b o u t 9 man months was
used f o r
the actual
project,
the
r e s t b e i n g used f o r r e s e a r c h .
The
of
the
computer
faci 1 it i e s
are
University
of
Kar 1 s r u h e
available,
free of
c h a r g e , as t h e
University provides t h i s service f o r
r e s e a r c h and s i n c e t h e U n i v e r s i t y i s
a state institution,
other
state
i n s t i t u t i o n s l i k e t h e L W A c a n be
serviced by the University ( i n t h i s
c a s e by t h e IWK)

Question 73:
A t t h i s stage o f
the planning
process,
no
direct
citizen
But
participation
took
place.
i n d i r e c t l y , o f course, t h e c i t i z e n s
had a l r e a d y r e s t r i c t e d t h e p o s s i b l e
s i t e s and s i z e s o f
the reservoirs,
which
were
entered
as
fixed
q u a n t i t i e s i n t h e planning process.
it
was
possible f o r
the
Thus
m o d e l l e r t o r e d u c e t h e s i z e or t h r o w
of
the
out
altogether
some
r e s e r v o i r s , b u t n o t t o i n c r e a s e them
nor
t o select
new and a d d i t i o n a l
locations.

Question 14:
A t o t a l o f 7 a l t e r n a t i v e s were
investigated.
The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e
study
w e r e t o o b t a i n a maximum
protection a t the least
incremental
cost.
For example, i f b y b u i l d i n g
an a d d i t i o n a l
reservoir
the flood
d o w n s t r e a m c o u l d b e changed b y o n l y
a few p e r c e n t ,
i t was c o n s i d e r e d
more u s e f u l t o i n c r e a s e t h e c a p a c i t y
of
the creeks s l i g h t l y r a t h e r than

t o buy an e x p e n s i v e r e s e r v o i r .
The
dec i s i o n
on
the
f eas i b 1 e
alternatives
were d i s c u s s e d between
t h e IWK and t h e l o c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
of t h e SWA.

Question 15:
The h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e was
f a i r l y simple.
Since t h e s t r u c t u r e
o f the d e c i s i o n process
i s s e t by
law,
the d e c i s i o n r e s t s w i t h the
d i s t r i c t b o a r d w h i c h i s a d v i s e d by
t h e SWA.
The
IWK and t h e l o c a l
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e SWA t o g e t h e r
worked o u t
t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be
s u b j e c t e d t o d e t a i l e d s t u d y and t h e
ones t o be p r e s e n t e d t o t h e e c h e l o n s
of
t h e SWA.
The f i n a l p r o j e c t p l a n
was d e v e l o p e d i n a j o i n t m e e t i n g o f
IWK,
all
l e v e l s of
t h e SWA w i t h
interest
in
the
case,
and
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e FPD.

Question 16:
Already discussed i n
q u e s t i o n 10

answering

Questions 77 and 18:

The
method
employed
was
s i mu 1 a t i on
by
means
o f des i gn
d i f f e r e n t exceedance
r a i n f a l l s of
probability.
The r e s u l t s o f each
a l t e r n a t i v e were s c r u t i n i z e d b y t h e
p l a n n i n g team, and t h e a l t e r n a t i v e
was
selected
which
seemed,
by
intuition,
t o meet m o s t o f
the
p u r p o s e s and c o n s t r a i n t s .
There was
no
OR
method
employed i n t h e
decision process.

Question 79:
A l t h o u g h t h e S W A and t h e FPD
share
the
responsibility
for
proposing t h e f i n a l
project,
the
recommendations a r e m o s t l y t h o s e of
t h e model b u i l d e r (IWK).
The r e a s o n
i s t h a t the U n i v e r s i t y i s considered
most
q u a l i f i e d t o s o l v e complex
p l a n n i n g problems.
The d e c i s i o n t o
implement t h e s t u d y i s made b y t h e
F P D w i t h f i n a l a p p r o v a l r e q u i r e d by
the
responsible
ministry before
a c t u a l c o n s t r u c t i o n , as i s d e s c r i b e d
i n connection w i t h
question
27
below.

Question 20:
Most o f t h e p l a n n e r s were c i v i l
engineers
o r h y d r a u l i c engineers.
However,
through
the
hearing
mentioned i n q u e s t i o n 27, e x p e r t s o f
o t h e r agencies a r e
included,
but
t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s a r e made m o s t l y
d u r i n g t h e p l a n n i n g stage 4.

5.
Planning
Stage
4:
Development
of
Final
Project
Specifications
Whereas s t a g e 3 w a s d e s i g n e d t o
selecting
the
give a basis for
a l t e r n a t i v e s most l i k e l y t o s a t i s f y
t h e o b j e c t i v e s , s t a g e 4 i s concerned
w i t h the d e t a i l e d
investigation of
the f i n a l plan.
I t m u s t be r e a l i z e d
t h a t stage 3 i s a stage i n which n o t
all
t h e d a t a a r e used, n o r a r e a l l
n e c e s s a r y c a l c u l a t i o n s made.
In
stage
3 o n l y those aspects a r e
covered which v a r y from a l t e r n a t i v e
to
alternative,
and
the f i n a l
d e c i s i o n f o r s t a g e 3 i s made n o t o n
t h e d e t a i l e d p l a n , b u t on t h e b a s i s
o f p r e l i m i n a r y drawings.
The
aspects
which
are
investigated i n stage 4 are f i r s t
the
determination
of
operation
rules, then the evaluation o f
the
system
under
a
given
set of
operation rules
for
floods
of
d if f e r e n t
recurrence
intervals.
Finally,
t h e optimum sequence o f
building of
the
reservoirs
was
d e c i d e d on.

Question 21:

OR methods w e r e employed f o r
d e t e r m i n i n g t h e optimum o p e r a t i o n
rules.
I t was assumed t h a t t h e
hydrological
model
described
in
c o n n e c t i o n w i t h q u e s t i o n 10 p r o v i d e d
t h e f l o o d waves f o r w h i c h t h e s y s t e m
to
operate
optimally.
had
Originally,
an a c t i v e c o n t r o l was
e n v i s a g e d b y means o f w h i c h t h e
o p e r a t i o n o f a l l r e s e r v o i r s was t o
be
c o n t r o l 1 ed.
The
objective
f u n c t i o n c h o s e n was t h e o p e r a t i o n
w h i c h m i n i m i z e d t h e f l o o d peaks o f
t h e f l o o d wave r e l e a s e d f r o m t h e
r e s e r v o i r ( P l a t e and S c h u l t z 131).

The method was o r i g i n a l l y b a s e d

but
in a
on t w o r e s e r v o i r s o n l y ,
l a t e r s t u d y (Meyer-Zurwel l e d 1 7 ; ) i t
was e x t e n d e d t o u p t o 16 r e s e r v o i r s .
I n c r e m e n t a l d y n a m i c p r o g r a m m i n g was
4
u s e d , and a p p l i e d t o a g r o u p o f
r e s e r v o i r s each o f
which being a
lumped g r o u p o f u p t o 4 r e s e r v o i r s .
The o p e r a t i o n o f
t h e lumped g r o u p
was f i r s t d e t e r m i n e d a s
if
it
c o n s i s t e d o f a s i n g l e r e s e r v o i r , and
afterwards the optimization w i t h i n
t h e 4 r e s e r v o i r s o f t h e lumped g r o u p
was made w i t h t h e s h a r e o f t h e f l o o d
a l l o t t e d t o t h e group d u r i n g
the
f i r s t optimization step forming the
c o n s t r a i n t s t o t h e subproblem.
The
improved o p e r a t i o n o f t h e g r o u p t h e n
was o n c e more lumped and i t e r a t i v e l y
t h e problem o f
4 lumped r e s e r v o i r
g r o u p s and t h e p r o b l e m
of
the
distribution of
floods w i t h i n the
g r o u p s was s o l v e d u n t i l
further
iterations
b r o u g h t no a d d i t i o n a l
improvement.
I t turned out t h a t the
g a i n i n system p e r f o r m a n c e o f
a
16
reservoir
s y s t e m as compared t o a
s y s t e m i n w h i c h each r e s e r v o i r
is
operated independently o f a l l others
was r a t h e r
small,
because o f t h e
s m a l l s i z e o f t h e c a t c h m e n t and t h e
s h o r t d i s t a n c e s between r e s e r v o i r s .
Recent r e s e a r c h
in
the
Federal
Republic o f
Germany i s d i r e c t e d t o
f i n d i n g o p e r a t i n g r u l e s t h a t work
adoptively
on
the
basis o f
a
r a i n f a l l f o r e c a s t and t h e f o r e c a s t
of
hydrograph parameters.
Radar
methods a r e b e i n g employed f o r
the
rainfall
f o r e c a s t s (Schultz, Anderl
I 8 I ) . Real t i m e r u n o f f
et al.
f o r e c a s t s a r e developed on t h e b a s i s
o f Kalman f i l t e r s .
However,
the
results are not yet satisfactory
enough t o y i e l d methods f o r s y s t e m s
as s m a l l a s t h e one d e s c r i b e d ,
and
t h e r e e x i s t s some d o u b t t h a t i t w i l l
ever be u s e f u l t o use f o r e c a s t s f o r
a s y s t e m t h a t needs t o b e o p e r a t e d
o p t i m a l l y once o n t h e a v e r a g e e v e r y
30 t o 100 y e a r s .
W i t h t h i s i n mind,
a d i f f e r e n t method was employed b y
f i n d i n g o p e r a t i o n r u l e s based o n t h e
o u t 1e t
hydraulics
of
usua 1
structures
and
s p i 1 lways
for
r e s e r v o i r s w h i c h a r e s e t permanent
i n s u c h a way t h a t
t h e systems
100
p e r f o r m a n c e u n d e r t h e s e t of
y e a r s d e s i g n f l o o d s was as c l o s e as

-86-

p o s s i b l e t o t h e optimum.
f o u n d b y t r i a l and e r r o r .

This

was

Operations
research
methods
w e r e a l s o u s e d t o d e c i d e t h e optimum
sequence
of
construction.
The
original
idea
was
to
optimize
sequence and s c h e d u l i n g
i n such a
way t h a t s a v i n g s due t o p o s t p o n e m e n t
of
construction
were
b a 1 anced
a g a i n s t p o s s i b l e losses i n c u r r e d i f
a f l o o d w o u l d happen b e f o r e t h e
reservoir
was
completed.
This
problem
was
formulated
and
a
solution
developed
based
on
branch-and-bound t e c h n i q u e s (Bogardi
19;).
However,
there
were
two
handicaps
which
prevented
the
execution of
t h i s programme:
the
l a c k o f economic d a t a o n l o s s e s , and
t h e f i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s imposed o n
the
construction,
f o r which the
s t a t e has s e t a s i d e a
constant
amount e v e r y y e a r w i t h t h e t o t a l t o
be
expended
after
10
years.
T h e r e f o r e , t h e f i n a l d e c i s i o n on t h e
sequence was made o n t h e b a s i s o f
efficiency of
flood protection a t
the c r i t i c a l
point
( t h e Audi-NSU
automobile works
in the c i t y of
N e c k a r s u l m a t t h e mouth o f t h e Sulm
river):
those r e s e r v o i r s were b u i l t
first,
which brought t h e
largest
flood protection gain a t t h a t point.
I n case o f equal b e n e f i t ,
a series
of
other
critical
p o i n t s were
centers
or
identified
( v i 1 lage
i n d u s t r i a l a r e a s on p a r t s o f
the
Sulm or
i t s t r i b u t a r i e s w i t h small
f l o o d c h a n n e l s ) and t h a t
reservoir
p l a c e d f i r s t i n t h e sequence o f t h e
remaining r e s e r v o i r s which
would
cause
maximum b e n e f i t s
a t other
c r i t i c a l points.
T h e r e i s no q u e s t i o n t h a t a l l
t h e methods employed had b e e n used
before.
However,
t h e p r o b l e m had
n o t b e e n p o s e d i n t h e same f o r m s o
t h a t most o f
t h e e x i s t i n g methods
had t o be a d a p t e d , and no a l g o r i t h m
e x i s t e d which c o u l d be
employed
straightforwardly,
except o f course
s u c h r o u t i n e programs as u s e d f o r
matrix calculations.
I t seems t o us
i n similar situations only the
that
l o g i c a s employed by u s i s f e a s i b l e :
t o generate,
on
the
basis
of
hydrological
models,
families of
f l o o d h y d r o g r a p h s , f o r each o f w h i c h

the
reservoir
system's
optimum
o p e r a t i o n r u l e s b a s e d on p e r f e c t
f o r e c a s t s a r e found.
These r u l e s
a r e t h e n a n a l y s e d t o f i n d t h e ones
which
would
yield
the
best
non-adoptive o p e r a t i n g r u l e s .
There
maybe d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e methods o f
a n a l y s i s due
to
the
situation
encountered
and
the
d a t a base
available
(but a hydrologic data
base as e x t e n s i v e as
t h e one used
for
the present studies i s usually
a
not
required.
Unfortuntely
detailed analysis o f
the required
s i z e o f a network f o r small areas i s
s t i l l not available).
'

Question 22:
No c o s t b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s was
made.
I n any case, i t i s f e l t t h a t
the basic decision o f b u i l d i n g the
s y s t e m has
l i t t l e t o do w i t h c o s t b e n e f i t , s i n c e a l t e r n a t i v e ways o f
flood protection (object protection,
flood
insurance) m i g h t be most c o s t
effective.
More i m p o r t a n t a r e t h e
of
t h e pub1 i c and t h e
concern
of
funds.
F lood
avai l a b i 1 i t y
p r o t e c t i o n i n t h e FRG i s a p o l i t i c a l
i s s u e on t h e one hand, and a m a t t e r
o f economics on t h e o t h e r hand.
Economics e n t e r f o r
example
i f an
i n d u s t r i a l p l a n t i s t o be l o c a t e d i n
a f l o o d prone area.
But i t should be mentioned t h a t
t h e F e d e r a l Water Law r e q u i r e s t h a t
all
p r o j e c t s be s u b j e c t e d t o a c o s t
benefit analysis.
Because o f
this
requirement,
one
of
the
most
intensive area of f l o o d research i n
is
t h e F e d e r a l R e p u b l i c o f Germany
c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e economic s i d e o f
f l o o d s (Buck e t a l . ,
19;).
There
a r e a number o f r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s i n
t h i s area,
and a t t e m p t s a r e b e i n g
made by d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s t o o b t a i n
t h e n e c e s s a r y f u n d s t o c o n d u c t case
studies.

Question 23:
Neither
risk
analysis
nor
impact
analysis
was
performed.
German a u t h o r i t i e s c o n s i d e r
that
r i s k analysis
i s not required for
p u b l i c w a t e r works i f t h e s t a n d a r d s
( D I N 19700) a r e met.
However, t h e r e
i s a t p r e s e n t c o n s i d e r a b l e concern

-87-

t o p r o v i d e a u n i f i e d b a s i s of
risk
analysis
f o r a l l p u b l i c works.
The
F e d e r a l M i n i s t r y o n Research and
Technology i s s p o n s o r i n g a r e s e a r c h
program on r i s k a n a l y s i s , and f i r s t
a t t e m p t s have been made t o p r o v i d e a
framework
of
risk
analysis
appl i c a b l e
to
flood
protection
reservoirs
on
the
basis
of
r e l i a b i l i t y theory (Plate I 11 I .
An
environmental
i mpac t
a n a l y s i s has n o t been p e r f o r m e d .
The r e s e r v o i r s a r e b l e n d e d i n t o t h e
landscape, landscape a r c h i t e c t u r e i s
heavily
employed.
Water
quality
problems a r i s e o n l y i n c o n t e x t w i t h
the
recreationally
filled
be
r e s e r v o i r s , and a program w i l l
s e t up b y t h e SWA and t h e FPO t o
s u r v e y and i f n e c e s s a r y c o n t r o l
the
In fact, the
q u a l i t y of t h e w a t e r .
usefulness o f
t h i s s u r v e y became
o b v i o u s soon a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e
reservoir
Breitenau,
i n which
a
s h a l l o w a r e a was
found e u t r o p i e d
a f t e r a f e w months, and w h i c h had t o
be
deepened
by
additional
excavation.
However,
this
i s not
of
the
plannng.
Other
part
environmental
concerns,
voiced a t
t h e h e a r i n g m e n t i o n e d i n q u e t i o n 27
c o u l d b e met i n t h e f i n a l d e s i g n
stage.
As a r e s u l t o f o b j e c t i o n s by
environmentalists,
one
of
the
r e s e r v o i r s was e l i m i n a t e d t o p r o t e c t
a w e t l a n d area.
Also archeologists
expected t o f i n d t r a c e s o f
ancient
s e t t l e m e n t s a t some o f t h e s i t e s ,
and s p e c i a l
c a r e was used d u r i n g
e x c a v a t i o n s , b u t n o t h i n g was f o u n d .

Question 24:
The s e l e c t i o n o f t h e f i n a l p l a n
has a l r e a d y been made i n p r i n c i p l e
a t t h e end o f s t a g e 3.
Here, o n l y
t h e f i n a l o p e r a t i o n r u l e s and f i n a l
s i z e s w e r e d e t e r m i n e d , w h i c h was
m o s t l y a t e c h n i c a l m a t t e r dec d e d by
in consultation w t h the
t h e SWA
IWK.
S m a l l changes o c c u r r e d n t h e
d e s i g n s t a g e f o l l o w i n g stage 4. b u t
t h e y were d e a l t w i t h l o c a l l y .

Question 26:
The d e c i s i o n made f o l l o w e d t o
t h e l e t t e r t h e recommendation o f t h e
IWK.
This
i s because t h e f i n a l
report
i n w h i c h t h e recommendations
w e r e put down was
prepared
in
A first
c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e SWA.
d r a f t was s e n t t o them f o r comments,
i f t h e y f e l t t h a t t h e y were u n a b l e
to
accept
one
of
the
recommendations.
A compromise was
f o u n d i n w h i c h t h e h y d r o l o g y was n o t
q u e s t i o n e d b u t a r e d u c t i o n was made
1 oca 1 1 y o f exceedance p r o b a b i 1 i t y
for
the
flood returned by the
reservoir according t o the value o f
t h e p r o p e r t i e s i n the flooded area.
No OR t e c h n i q u e s w e r e u s e d f o r t h i s .

Question 27:
Approval t o t h e f i n a l
plan i s
given by the county administrator
(Landrat) on t h e b a s i s of the p l a n s
s u b m i t t e d and a p p r o v e d by t h e FPD.
The L a n d r a t ' s a p p r o v a l i s g i v e n f o r
e a c h r e s e r v o i r s e p a r a t e l y , and o n l y
i f t h e r e a r e no o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e
p r o j e c t from other p o t e n t i a l users,
which m i g h t be p r i v a t e p a r t i e s o r
other
Government
agencies l i k e t h e
S t a t e Highway D e p a r t m e n t o r
the
Department
of
Environmental
Protection.
I n order t o coordinate
a l l objections, a public hearing i s
conducted
(ca 1 1 ed
"Planfests t u l l u n g s v e r f a h r e n " or " P r o c e d u r e o f
f i n a l i z i n g t h e Plan") i n w h i c h t h e
county a d m i n i s t r a t o r (Landrat) or a
more d i r e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f
the
r e s p o n s i b l e m i n i s t r y (of Environment
and A g r i c u l t u r e ) i s t r y i n g t o s e t t l e
a l l open q u e s t i o n s and t o d e c i d e o n
pending issues.
A t
t h i s hearing,
the
public
is
invited,
and a l l
o b j e c t i o n s c a n be v o i c e d b y anyone.
The s t a t e c a n r e f u t e o r c o n f i r m t h e
o b j e c t i o n upon h e a r i n g o f
expert
witnesses.
If all
objections
are
met,
t h e p l a n i s a c c e p t e d ; i f some
o f t h e o b j e c t i o n s a r e n o t met b u t
overruled by the o f f i c i a l , the p l a n
i s a l s o accepted, b u t t h e o v e r r u l i n g
m i g h t be appealed t o a c o u r t ,
which
i s independent o f t h e m i n i s t r y .

Question 28:
F u n d i n g was done t h r o u g h a p a r t
o f t h e b u d g e t earmarked f o r
flood
protection.
T h i s i s d i s t r i b u t e d by
t h e r e s p o n s i b l e m i n i s t r y over
all
projects
in
the
state
of
Baden-Wurttemberg,
according t o a
l i s t of
p r i o r i t y worked o u t i n t h e
ministry.
The
present
project
DM p e r y e a r ,
r e c e i v e s about 2 M i l l .
and
construction
must
progress
funds.
according t o a v a i l a b i l i t y of
The
total
construction w i l l
be
c o m p l e t e d i n 1990.

Question 29:
Due t o t h e a l e r t n e s s
and t h e
personal
interest
of
the local
representative of
the
SWA,
the
project
i s c l o s e l y s u p e r v i s e d and
improved t h r o u g h l o c a l e f f o r t s .
An
a u t o m a t i c f l o o d w a r n i n g system i s
being
installed.
And a f t e r
each
flood
(in particularly after
the
1978 f l o o d ) a c a r e f u l e v a l u a t i o n o f
t h e system performance
i s carried
out, including a recalculation of
t h e h y d r o l o g y a f t e r t h e 1978 f l o o d
b y t h e IWK.

6 Planning
Design

Stage

5:

Project

Question 30:
The p l a n n i n g r e s u l t s - i n c l u d e d :
the reservoirs, the
the sizes o f
operation rules f o r the reservoirs,
t h e maximum d i s c h a r g e s i n t h e r i v e r s
and
cana 1 s
c o n n e c t i ng
the
reservoirs.
A l s o , t h e sequence o f

b u i l d ng t h e r e s e r v o i r s was d e c i d e d .
With
this
information,
t h e SWA
usual y
would
make
a
limited
compe i t i o n ,
inviting
renowned
the
c o n s u l t i n g f i r m s t o b i d on
design,
and o n t h e s u p e r v i s i o n o f
the construction.
The s u c c e s s f u l
bidder
then
would
prepare
the
d r a w i n g s , s u b j e c t t o a p p r o v a l by t h e
SWA,
and
the
c o n s t r u c t i o n was
In
the
initiated
thereafter.
present
case,
t h e SWA had t h e
e x p e r i e n c e and t h e man-power
t o do
t h e designs
itself,
and b i d s w e r e
r e q u e s t e d on t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o n l y .
The system i s under c o n s t r u c t i o n , a
total
o f 5 r e s e r v o i r s have been
b u i l t , and t h e p a r t i a l l y c o m p l e t e d
system,
containing
the
biggest
reservoir
(Breitenau),
a l r e a d y had
i t s f i r s t s u c c e s s when a n e x t r e m e
flood
(exceedance p r o b a b i l i t y
in
some l o c a l i t i e s o f once
i n 70 o r
more y e a r s ) o c c u r r e d i n 1978.
In fact,
calculations
after
t h i s e v e n t have shown t h a t i f t h e
Audi-NSU w o r k s had b e e n s u b j e c t e d t o
t h e same f l o o d w i t h t h e r e s e r v o i r
s y s t e m e x i s t i n g i n 1970, t h e damage
a t t h i s l o c a t i o n a l o n e w o u l d have
b e e n 90 M i l l i o n OM - e x c e e d i n g t h e
c o s t o f t h e system by about a f a c t o r
o f 8.

Acknowledgement
The s u c c e s s o f t h e p r o j e c t
is
i n l a r g e p a r t due t o t h e e f f o r t s o f
t h e l o c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e SWA,
Mr.
H.
Trost,
Waserwirtschaftsamt H e i l b r o n n .
He a l s o p r o v i d e d
many d e t a i l s o f t h i s r e p o r t .

References
Mosonyi
et
al.
1979
111 E.
"Empf eh 1 ungen
fur
die
Ber ec hnungen
der E
Hochwasserwahrscheinlichkeit
(Recommenda t i o n
for
the
calculation
of
flood
probabilities)
Committee on
Des i gn F 1 oods,
DVWK
(German
Water
Resources
Assoc .)
Recommendation N r .
101

171

181 B .

Ander I,
W.
Attmannspacher, G.A.
Schultz
1976 " A c c u r a c y o f r e s e r v o i r
inflow
forecasts
based o n
r a d a r r a i n f a l l measurements".
In:
Water R e s o u r c e s R e s e a r c h ,
Vol.
12,
No.
2,
PP.
2 17-223.

Bauch 1971
Seus and W .
121 G.J.
"On
t h e optimization of the
s t o r a g e areas a t
design of
river
dams"
Proc.
14.
Congress
I n t e r v a l 1 Assoc.
of
H y d r a u l i c Research, P a r i s V o l .
5 pp. 263-292.
Schultz
131 E . P l a t e and G . A .
1972 " F l o o d C o n t r o l P o l i c i e s
Development b y
Simulation".
2 nd
Intern.
P r o c e e d i ngs
Hydrology
Symposium,
Fort
Col 1 i ns, USA, pp.
246-258.

Branch
B o g a r d i 1979 " A
and Bound A l g o r i t h m t o F i n d
O p t i m a l C o n s t r u c t i o n Sequence
f o r Flood Control Reservoirs".
In:
Hydraulic Engineering i n
Water
Resources
Development
and Management.
Proc.
18th
I AHR
Congress,
Cagl i a r i ,
I t a l y , Vol.
2 , pp.
55-62.

191 J . J .

141 M.

B i m a r k , J.
Bogardi,
and
1979
"An
E.J.
Plate
and
Integrated
Channe 1
R e s e r v o i r R o u t i n g Model U s i n g
Generated
Mu 1 t i s i t e
P r e c i p i t a t i o n D a t a as I n p u t "
In:
Hydraulic Engineering i n
Water
R e s o u r c e s Development
and Management.
Proceedings,
1 8 t h IAHR Congress, C a g l i a r i ,
I t a l y , Vol.
5 , pp. 287-294.

151

G.A.
S c h u l t z 1968 "Bestimmung
t h e o r e t i scher
Abflussganglinien
durch
e l e k t r o n i s c h e Berechnung v o n
N i e d e r s c h l a g s k o n z e n t r a t i o n und
Retention
(HYREUN-Verf a h r e n )
Ber i c h t
Nr.
11
der
V e r s u c h s a n s t a l t f u r Wasserbau
der T.U.
Munchen.

CH.
Schroder
1974
"Detaillierte
hydrologische
Model l e
fur
instationare
Niederschlag-Abfluss Modelle"
Die
Bautechnik
1974,
pp.
30 1-306.

161 R .

J . M e y e r - Z u r w e l l e 1973" O p t i m u m
r e l e a s e s t r a t e g i e s f o r systems
of
flood
protection
In:
Research
reservo irs"
and p r a c t i c e i n t h e
water
environment.
Proc.
of
thg
XV.
IAHR Congrtess, I s t a n b u l
1973. V o l . 4, pp. 205-214.

!lo!

W.Buch, J.
K l a u s and R . F .
Schmidtke
(ed i t o r )
1983,"Wasserwirtschaftliche
Projektbewer tung
(Eva1 u a t i o n
o f water resources projects)
Report
publ ished
by
the
Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft
(German
Research
As soc i a t i on)
Comm i s s i o n
on
Water R e s e a r c h , M i t t e i l u n g N r .

".

5.
1 1 1 1 E.J.
P l a t e 1984 " R e l i a b i l i t y
a n a l y s i s o f dam s a f e t y "
in
"Frontiers
in
Hydrology:
(L.E.
B e a r d and W.
Hal 1
Maxwel 1 :
editors)
Water..
resources
publ i c a t i o n s
pp.
288-304.

DEVELOPMENT OF WATER SUPPLY SCHEMES IN THE EASTERN NEGEV, ISRAEL:

GENERAL DESCRIPTION

D. ALKAN,
Tahal Consulting Engineers Limited
Israel
October 1982

1.

Introduction

The E a s t e r n Negev r e g i o n c o v e r s
kilometres
of
some 2500 s q u a r e
desert
land i n South o f I s r a e l .
It
is
characterized
by
1 arge
d i f f e r e n c e s o f a l t i t u d e between + l 5 O
m above m.s.1.
i n t h e w e s t a n d +600
i n the east.
The r e g i o n i n c l u d e s
f i v e towns
(160,000
inhabitants) ,
thirteen villages with extensively
i r r ig a t e d
agr i c u l t u r e ,
two
i n d u s t r i a l centers, mainly chemical,
and
two
phosphate
mines.
The
c l i m a t e of t h e r e g i o n i s a r i d
(less
t h a n 200 mm r a i n p . a . ) , t h u s w a t e r
r e q u i r e m e n t s o f a l l user s e c t o r s a r e
r e l a t i v e l y high,
with a
peaking
distribution.
The a r e a i s a t p r e s e n t
in a
r a p i d p r o c e s s o f d e v e l o p m e n t and t h e
annual w a t e r demand i s e x p e c t e d t o
d o u b l e - f r o m a b o u t 50 MCM
at
present
t o a b o u t 100 MCM a t t h e end
A major i n c r e a s e i s
o f t h e decade.
e x p e c t e d i n i n d u s t r i a l and m u n i c i p a l
f r e s h w a t e r demand.
The w a t e r
supplied
to
the
r e g i o n comes from t h r e e s o u r c e s :
Import o f water from the n o r t h v i a
the national water
s u p p l y system
(25% a t p r e s e n t ) , l o c a l g r o u n d w a t e r
(65%) and r e c l a i m e d e f f l u e n t s f r o m
l o c a l sewage.
Fresh water i s being s u p p l i e d
b y two s e p a r a t e p i p e l i n e systems,
one f e d b y l o c a l
ground w a t e r
and
the other
by t h e n a t i o n a l system.

B o t h s y s t e m s convey w a t e r
eastwards
through
l o n g l i n e s and a s e r i e s o f
pumping s t a t i o n s
t o overcome t h e
l o n g d i s t a n c e s and l a r g e a l t i t u d e
differences.
The w a t e r
supply development
p l a n was e x p e c t e d t o a d d r e s s t h e
f o l l o w i n g issues:
a

The
d vision
of
supply
b e tween l o c a l and i m p o r t e d
sources
(annua 1
and
seasona 1 .

development
and
b . The
possibility
of
interc o n n e c t i o n between
the two
systems.
c . The
sequencing
development
in
time
space.
d.

Qf
and

The s e a s o n a l
variation
in
the
operation
of
the
integrated regional
supply
system.

S a l i n e g r o u n d w a t e r and sewage
effluents
a r e a l s o used i n t h e
region,
and
are
part
of
the
development
plan.
However, i n t h e
f o l l o w i n g o n l y t h e development
of
t h e f r e s h water
system used f o r
domestic,
i n d u s t r i a l and i r r i g a t i o n
purposes w i l l be d i s c u s s e d .
The r e s u l t i n g
plan
is
an
integrated
water
s u p p l y scheme,
connecting a l l
the
sources
and

-92-

users.
Previous plans divided the
area
i n t o separate water
supply
schemes:
mainly the northern branch
and t h e s o u t h e a s t e r n b r a n c h .
The
investments
required
to
expand t h e e x i s t i n g scheme t o t h e
"1990
level"
are
estimated
at
$20,000,000.

beyond t h e economical
efficiency,
such
as
maintaining
existing
and
promotion
of
a c t iv i t i e s
economical
activities,
daily
life
and a m e n i t i e s
i n t h e r e g i o n , were
o n l y i m p l i c i t l y considered.

Question 4
Three m a i n t y p e s o f c o n s t r a i n t s
were p o s e d :

2. Planning Stage 1:
Project
Initiation and Preliminary Planning

a.

A given forecast o f
w a t e r demands

consumers'

Question 1
The p l a n was
to f i t
i n t o an
o v e r a l l master p l a n f o r t h e r e g i o n ,
in
which
the
development
of
settlements, population, a g r i c u l t u r e
and
i n d u s t r y were
l a i d o u t and
integrated.
Such m a s t e r p l a n does
not
exist explicitly.
Sectorial
p l a n s f o r a g r i c u l t u r e , i n d u s t r y and
municipal
development
could
be
c o n s i d e r e d as a p l a n n i n g f r a m e w o r k .
The p u r p o s e o f t h e p r o j e c t was t o
p r e p a r e a 20 y e a r
plan for
the
d e v e l o p m e n t and e x p a n s i o n o f a w a t e r
s u p p l y system w h i c h e x i s t s i n p a r t s
of t h e r e g i o n .

b. L i m i t e d p r o d u c t i o n p o t e n t i a l o f
local
sources
and
limited
capacity o f t h e n a t i o n a l water
s u p p l y system.
c . The
1 i m i ted
capability of
the
systems.
a.

The
problem
of
demand
forecasting
was d i f f i c u l t f o r a
number o f r e a s o n s :

For
industrial
uses
the
development
plan
and
s c h e d u l e were u n c e r t a i n , and
the
water
qual it y
requirements
not
clearly
enough d e f i n e d .

For m u n i c i p a l u s e s t h e m a i n
p r o b l e m was t h e gap between
the
optimists
and
the
pessimists
concerning the
p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h and pace
o f p h y s i c a l development.

For a g r i c u l t u r a l
uses t h e
f u t u r e cropping patterns are
hardly
predictable
and
therefore the t o t a l
demand
as
well
as
the
time
distribution of
t h e annual
a l l o c a t i o n and peak demand
are dubious.

Question 2
The p l a n was p r e p a r e d b y TAHAL.
which i s t h e n a t i o n a l water p l a n n i n g
author i t y
Two
W.R.
s y s tems
engineers,
one programmer
and o n e
s t u d e n t worked i n t h e s t u d y .

Water s u p p l y i n I s r a e l
i s the
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f n a t i o n a l agencies,
which r e p r e s e n t t h e i n t e r e s t s of a l l
consumers and t h e p u b l i c a t l a r g e .
T h e r e f o r e , n o need was seen f o r
the
public
as
such t o p a r t i c i p a t e .
However,
representatives
of
the
consumers,
especially
farmers,
voiced t h e i r
c o n c e r n s and o p i n i o n s
o n v a r i o u s o c c a s i o n s , and t h u s had
an
input t o the planning process.
The
i n i t i a t i o n of
planning
was
required
by
local
consumer
organizations.

Question 3
The s i n g l e o b j e c t i v e o f
the
to
fully
supply the
p l a n was
i n c r e a s i n g w a t e r demand a t t h e l e a s t
overall
cost.
Decision c r i t e r i a

hydraul ic
existing

b . The p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t r a i n t s o f t h e
n a t i o n a l system a r e t w o f o l d :
the
in
nationwide s c a r c i t y of water
the
system
and
the limited
pipeline
c a p a c i t y o f a 42" D i a .
wi 11
be
(Zohar-Zel im)
which
s u p p l y i n g some 3000
capable o f
c.m.h.
to
the
region,
as
compared t o a peak demand o f
The
1 oca 1
13000
c.m.h.

-93-

groundwater
sources a r e l i m i t e d
by a
safe
yield
which
is
estimated
a t 35 MCM and t h e
local
l i m i t e d c a p a c i t y o f 20
wells
which
are
capable o f
p r o d u c i n g a t o t a l o f 5000 c.m.h.
The n a t i o n a l h y d r o l o g i c a l s e r v i c e
was
involved i n estimating the
safe y i e l d .
c.

The
existing
pip1 ines
and
pumping s t a t i o n s l i m i t t h e conveying capacities i n a p a r t o f
t h e l i n k s i n t h e system.

Question 5
The
existing
water
supply
systems have been d e s i g n e d p a r t w i s e .
The
introduction
of
O.R.
and
systems . eng i n e e r i ng
has
been
accompanied b y a l o n g d i s p u t e ,
an
end t o w h i c h was p u t by t h e f i n a l
report only.
A l o n g t h e work
itself
there
was
an
argument o f
the
p r e f e r i n g o f a "snapshot
model"
which
deals
w i t h the h y d r a u l i c
variables i n greater detail,
or a
" t i me expans i on"
mode 1 wh i c h dea 1 s
a l s o w i t h l o n g t e r m e x p a n s i o n and
economical
preferences along the
time
axis.
Finally
a
"time
e x p a n s i o n model" has been p r e f e r r e d
and p o s t f a c t u m examined more d e e p l y
b y t h e means o f a " s n a p s h o t
model"
a t two d e c i s i v e t i m e p o i n t s .

3.
Planning Stage 2:
Collection & Processing

Data

c o n s i d e r a t i o n as a s l o w g r o w t h r a t e
i n t h e per c a p i t a use, t y p i c a l f o r
e a c h t o w n a c c o r d i n g t o i t s s i z e and
present standard o f services.
Peak
month r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r
the future
are
somewhat
higher
than
the
e x i s t i n g as a s a f e t y f a c t o r .
I n d u s t r i a l f u t u r e consumption
i s based o n e x i s t i n g development
and
their
specific
s c e n a r i os
quantity
and
time
qual it y ,
d i s t r i b u t i o n requirements.
A g r i c u l t u r a l f u t u r e consumption
i s based o n e x i s t i n g development
schemes, w h i c h i n c l u d e t h e g r o w t h o f
sewage
availability.
Existing
a g r i c u l t u r e w i l l c a r r y on w i t h t h e
existing
annual
and peak m o n t h
allocations.
New v i l l a g e s w i l l
be
based
on
a
basic
freshwater
allocation
(0.7MCM)
and t h e r e s t
will
be s u p p l i e d from
reclaimed
sewage and s a l i n e w a t e r s o u r c e s .
The
estimate
c a p a c i t y was based
r e c o r d e d f l o w s and
capacities.

of
existing
o n t h e maximum
n o t on r a t e d

The h y d r o l o g i c c o n s t r a i n t s w e r e
a r e s u l t o f a r e g i o n a l model-aided
geohydrologic1 study.

Question 7.

Yes

Question 8.

Yes

Question 9.

No

Question 10.

No

Question 6
Annual,
peak
and
1ow
c o n s u m p t i o n d a t a h a v e been c o l l e c t e d
for
t h e p a s t y e a r s from "Mekorot"
company d a t a base.
"Mekorot" i s t h e
o n l y water s u p p l i e r i n the r e g i o n .
The d a t a a r e s p e c i f i e d f o r t h e t h r e e
main
consumer
sectors
i n each
p r e s s u r e zone.
The f u t u r e p r o j e c t i o n t e c h n i q u e
was d i f f e r e n t f o r each s e c t o r :
Domestic f u t u r e consumption
is
based
on
a
population
growth
e s t i m a t e f o r each town i n a c c o r d a n c e
w i t h r e g i o n a l and m u n i c i p a l m a s t e r
p l a n s . The l i v i n g s t a n d a r d g r o w t h
factor
has
been
taken
into

4.
Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation and Screening of
Project Alternatives
Question 1 1
Two s y s t e m s e n g i n e e r s and one
programmer w o r k e d on t h e f o r m u l a t i o n
of
a
numerical
optimization
s c r e e n i n g model, w h i c h i n c l u d e d a l l
a p p a r e n t l y p o s s i b l e r e s o u r c e s and
l i n k s i n t h e network.
The MPSX L . P .
Solver aided b y a M a t r i x Generator
and r e p o r t w r i t e r was u s e d o n a I B M
370/158
computer.
The
total
manpower r e q u i r e d i s e s t i m a t e d a t 1 2
man-months.
With
the
g a i n of

e x p e r i e n c e and t h e
improvement o f
I .o.
auxiliary
programs
the
m o d e l i n g phase has been c o n s i d e r a b l y
shortened.

Question 12
The p r o j e c t was
i n i t i a t e d and
financed
by
the national
water
p l a n n i n g and a l l o c a t i n g a u t h o r i t i e s ,
i.e.
t h e water
commissioner
and
" M e k o r o t " Company.
Th i s p r o j e c t was
W.R.
systems
part of
a national
analysis.

Question 13
The
consumers
and
water
a u t h o r i t i e s took
part
i n the data
collection
stage.
The
final
s o l u t i o n was n o t a c c e p t e d b y p a r t o f
t h e consumers who f e l t n e g l e c t e d as
most o f
t h e d e v e l o p m e n t was
for
p a r t s o f t h e system i n f a r
distance
f r o m them.
However a c o m p r e h e n s i v e
e x a m i n a t i o n shows
the c o n t r i b u t i o n
of
t h e p l a n t o t h e w e l l b e i n g and
amenity o f
the majority of
the
population.

Question 15
The
decision-making
process
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e p l a n n i n g was
in
four
levels:
(a)
The p l a n n e r s
1 e v e 1 , (b) A p r o f e s s i ona 1 t e c h n i c a 1
s t e e r i ng
comm i t t e e
checked
engineering
i s s u e s and examined t h e
impacts on
local
and o t h e r W.R.
systems, (c) A h i g h e r l e v e l s t e e r i n g
committee o f
the National
Water
Commissioner's
O f f i c e which d e a l t
w i t h r e g i o n a l and o v e r a l l i m p a c t s o n
and o t h e r
systems: t h e
t h e W.R.
p u b l i c delegates a l s o took p a r t
in
that
committee,
(d)
A statutory
p l a n n i n g committee o f
the
Water
Commissioner
composed o f d e l e g a t e s
f r o m p u b l i c a g e n c i e s and consumer
sector
representatives.
The
conflicts
arose
mainly
on t h e
d e v e l o p m e n t and o p e r a t i o n o f
the
s o u r c e s and c o n v e y i n g systems.
Most
o f t h e r e s o l u t i o n s were achieved
in
the technical
level
and c o n f i r m e d
a f t e r w a r d s on t h e h i g h e r l e v e l s .

Question 16.
Imposed c o n s t r a i n t s :

Question 14
The m a i n a l t e r n a t i v e s
of
the
plan
are:
I.
The d i v i s i o n o f
s u p p l y between t h e v a r i o u s
sources
and
i t s seasonal
and
l o n g term
The f l o w
i n links
variations: I I .
of
t h e n e t w o r k ; I l l . The t r a d e o f f
i n t e n s iv e
was
between
the
development o f t h e s o u t h e r n o r t h e
n o r t h e r n b r a n c h o f t h e main system,
and b e t w e e n t h e s t r e n g t h e n i n g o f t h e
c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e n a t i o n a l system or
t h e development o f l o c a l groundwater
IV.
The s e q u e n c i n g o f
resources;
development;
V.
The
trade-off
between
pipe
diameter
and
A
large
booster-pump
capacities.
number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s had t h e r e f o r e
to
b e examined.
Indeed i n t h e
p r o p a g a t i o n towards
the
optimal
model s e a r c h e s
s o l u t i o n the L.P.
t h r o u g h a l a r g e number o f
feasible
s o l u t i o n s which are a l l
inferior
"alternatives".
Every i t e r a t i o n i n
the s o l u t i o n process i s a d e t a i l e d
inferior
solution
in
terms o f
To j u s t i f y t h e
economic e f f i c i e n c y .
i s possible to
chosen s o l u t i o n i t
exhibit
some
of
these
inferior
alternatives.

a.
The e x i s t i n g system had t o
be t a k e n
i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n though
n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be e x p l o i t e d i n f u l l
capac i t y

b.
The s o u r c e s ' p o t e n t i a l was
based
on
prior
investigations.
Sensitivity
t e s t s h a v e been made t o
t h e annual
safe
yield.
These
c o n s t r a i n t s were imposed b y t h e G.W.
hydroloical
experts of
b o t h Tahal
and t h e Water Commissioner.
c.
F o r e c a s t demands had t o b e
satisfied.
The scope o f
future
development o f i r r i g a t i o n a r e a s was
discussed
with
the agricultural
planning agencies.
d.
Q u a l i t y constraints could
n o t be r e l a x e d .
For a p a r t o f t h e
consumers
they
seemed
not
reasonable,
m a i n l y some t y p e s o f
i n d u s t r y w h i c h demanded t h e b e s t
quality available.

Question 17
a. A long-term development/operation
developrnent/operation
model has

-95-

model has been d e v e l o p e d i n T a h a l

Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e 1 , f o r t h e
of
regional
W.R.
analysis
systems.
The model i s b a s e d on
t h e L.P.
technique
for
the
optimization of
t h e development
r e g i o n a l W.R.
and o p e r a t i o n o f
sys tems

b.

A h y d r a u l i c n e t work s o l v e r has
been u s e d i n p a r a l l e l
f o r the
refinement of
t h e s o l u t i o n and
hydraulic
dimensioning.
The
model i s a s i m u l a t o r a n a l y z i n g a
"snapshot
picture"
for
a given
set o f data.
The t r a n s l a t i o n o f
t h e o v e r a l l development/operation
scheme
i n t o a detailed plan for
each o f
t h e development
stages
requires r e p e t i t i v e application
of
t h i s model f o r each s t a g e and
f o r each season.

The n e t work s o l v e r i s b a s e d on
t h e Newton-Raphson t e c h n i q u e and has
been d e v e l o p e d and programmed
in
Water
Supply
and
"Mekor o t h"
Development Company, I s r a e l .

Question 78
B o t h m o d e l s h a v e been t e s t e d on
h i s t o r i c a l d a t a , and t u r n e d o u t t o
operate,
however
not reaching the
same o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n .

5. Planning Stage 4: Development

of Final Project Specifications

Question 2 I
Based o n t h e MPSX s y s t e m f o r
the
s o l u t i o n o f L.P.models,a
r a t h e r sophi s t i c a t e d g e n e r a l model f o r t h e l o n g systt e r m a n a l y s i s o f r e g i o n a l W.R.
has been d e v e l o p e d i n t h e l a s t y e a r s .
The model c a l l e d "Tekurna" (L .P. f o r
W.R.
systems)
i s composed o f a
m a t r i x g e n e r a t o r and a r e p o r t w r i t e r
combined w i t h t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l MPSX
system.
I t serves today as
an
operative
instrument
for
the
l o n g - t e r m p l a n n i n g o f r e g i o n a l W.R.
systems.
This
regional
multi-sector,
multi-seasonal,
mu1 t i - p e r i o d ,
mu1 t i - s t a t e ,
m u l t i - q u a l i t y model i s a n outcome o f
t h r e e main e f o r t s
in
the
mid
seventies:
a.
A national multi-regional,
multi-sector,
multi-seasonal s i n g l e
p e r i o d L.P.
model (Chayat E Vanunu
- T a h a l , 1975). w h i c h combines t h e
optimization
of
both
the
a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n p l a n and t h e
operation of national
and r e g i o n a l
W.R.
and s u p p l y systems.
b.
A national multi-sector,
multi-period,
multi-state,
D.P.
model (Schwarz, 1980).

Question 79
The s e l e c t i o n o f t h e f i n a l p l a n
has been d i s c u s s e d b y t h e t e c h n i c a l
committee,
as
well
as b y t h e
s t e e r i n g committee i n which b o t h t h e
a u t h o r i t i e s and t h e p u b l i c
took
part.
The f i n a l p l a n has a l s o been
p r e s e n t e d i n consumers' c o n f e r e n c e s ,
which f i n a l l y confirmed i t .

Question 20
T h e r e was an
interdisciplinary
p l a n n i n g e f f o r t , b u t t h e m i x between
W.R.
p l a n n e r s and o t h e r k i n d s o f
planners
was
not
appropriate.
N a t i o n a l p l a n n e r s agencies s u p p l i e d
d a t a , p a r t o f w h i c h were " i n
the
or o f l o w r e l i a b i l i t y .
The
making"
involvement of t h e n a t i o n a l general
planning a u t h o r i t i e s
(Ministry of
Interior)
i n t h e l o c a l W.R.
system
p l a n n i n g i s n o t s t r o n g enough.

c.
A regional multi-objective,
mu1 t i - s e c t o r ,
multi-seasonal,
m u l t i - p e r i o d L.P.
model
(Alkan f
Shamir
- T e c h n i o n , H a i f a , 19771,
which
analyzes
the
long
term
development
and
o p e r a t i o n of
a
r e g i o n a l W.R.
system.
T h i s work
dealt with
t h e E a s t e r n Negev as
well,
b u t c o v e r e d a l a r g e r a r e a and
a wider
scope o f
national
goals,
s u c h as employment and e n v i r o n m e n t a l
impacts.
The g e n e r a l
p u r p o s e "Tekuma"
model (Schwarz, A l k a n e t a1
Tahal,
1981) was d e v e l o p e d i n t h e
l a t e s e v e n t i e s and has b e e n u s e d
three regions
in
s i n c e then for
- E a s t e r n Negev, W e s t e r n
Israel
Negev and A r a v a V a l l e y .
A t present,
s u c h a model i s used f o r p l a n n i n g
W.R.
the
long
term
national
d e v e l o p m e n t and o p e r a t i o n ,
as w e l l

as t h e p l a n n i n g
part of Israel.

of

the

central

Question 22
Unit costs are included i n the
model.
T o t a l c o s t s a r e p r e s e n t e d as
part of the results.

Question 23
No s p e c i f i c r i s k a n a l y s i s was
carried out.
However, t h e d e s i g n o f
reservoirs
was
based
on s h o r t
breakdown p e r i o d s o f t h e e l e c t r i c i t y
s u p p l y t o pumping s t a t i o n s .

Question 24
P r e f e r r e d s o l u t i o n s were found
f o r d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s o f t h e unknown
parameters.
The most
l i k e l y value
was
finally
selected.
The
trade-offs
c o u l d b e examined
by
shadow
prices
of
the
various
constraints.
The o p t i m a l p l a n s u g g e s t s t h e
strengthening
of
the
northern,
p o o r l y d e v e l o p e d arm and t h e c l o s i n g
of
t h e r e g i o n a l main system i n t o a
loop.
To c o n v i n c e t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l
b o d i e s and above a l l t h e s o u t h e r n
part
consumers,
a
number
of
e c o n o m i c a l l y i n f e r i o r s o l u t i o n s were
presented.
The
suggested
development
scheme f o r t h e " e i g h t i e s "
consists
of
i n v e s t m e n t s and i t e m s l i s t e d i n
t h e t a b l e enclosed h e r e a f t e r .

Question 25
The p r o j e c t
encourages
the
local
solution
o f environmental
nuisances by t h e enlargement
of
a r e a s i r r i g a t e d b y sewage e f f l u e n t s .
The
extensive
reuse
of
sewage
effluents
for
irrigation
in
the
Beersheva v a l l e y does n o t c r e a t e
t i l l t h i s day any s e v e r e damages o r
disturbances t o the public,
and on
the other
hand adds t o t h e a r e a a
l a r g e green o a s i s
i n the desert.
two n a t i o n a l
The
development o f
industry centers
i n the
Eastern
Negev e n a b l e s t h e t r a n s f e r o f a l l
heavily polluting
i n d u s t r i e s from

the central p a r t of the country t o

the desert.
The p u r p o s e o f t h i s
transfer,
in
addition
to
the
p r e v e n t i o n of d i r e c t
nuisances,
is
the protection of
t h e main f r e s h
groundwater sources.
The s o u t h e r n
part of
t h e E a s t e r n Negev i s non
a q u i f e r i c and s p a r s e l y i n h a b i t e d and
thus s u i t a b l e f o r industries.

Question 26
The i n t r o d u c t i o n o f an O.R.
device for
p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s was
somewhat p r o b l e m a t i c .
The " b l a c k
box"
was
not
always
rightly
appreciated
and a c c e p t e d b y a l l
people
involved.
Prior
to
the
regional analysis
t h e p l a n n i n g and
operation
of
the
region
was
completely
separate
for
the
northern,
groundwater
fed
Beer
Sheva r e g i o n , and f o r
the southern
Har
Hanegev r e g i o n ,
f e d by t h e
n a t i o n a l system.
The
integrated
regional
and t h e
a p p r o a c h from t h e s t a r t ,
solution
which
contradicted the
" s e p a r a t i s t i c " a p p r o a c h , were r a t h e r
d i f f i c u l t t o b r i n g through
both
p r o f e s s i n a l and s t e e r i n g c o m m i t t e e s .
"Convent i ona 1 ' I
d e s i gn and d i r e c t
comparison o f
alternatives
were
supplemented.

Question 27
The p r o c e s s o f a p p r o v a l was by
t h e two l e v e l
s t e e r i n g committees
and f i n a l l y b y a s t a t u t o r y p l a n n i n g
committee of t h e w a t e r commissioner.
This
i s u s u a l l y a tedious process
which r e q u i r e s n o t
l e s s t h a n one
year a f t e r completing t h e plan.
The
rapidly
i n c r e a s i n g demands p r e s s e d
t h e decision-makers t o accept a p l a n
and
execute
within
a
shorter
schedule.
A f t e r h a v i n g succeeded i n
convincing t h a t the optimal p l a n i s
a l s o advantageous
i n the e f f i c i e n t
p h a s i n g o f t h e e x e c u t i o n , p i p e s have
been o r d e r e d i n t h e f a c t o r y s h o r t l y
after

Question 28
The p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s have
been c o o r d i n a t e d c o n t i n u o u s l y w i t h
the national
financial
referee i n

t h e s t e e r i n g committee.
National
b u d g e t s h a v e been p r o m i s e d f o r
the
v a r i o u s s y s t e m development s t a g e s i n
f u l l accordance w i t h the suggested
plan.

6 . Planning Stage 5.
Design
Question 30

The d e s i g n phase was c a r r i e d

out
separately
by
another
e n g i n e e r i n g team.
The
detailed
design
of
p i p e l i n e l a y o u t s and
pumping
stations
followed
the
g e n e r a l p l a n r e s u l t i n g from t h e O . R .
anal y s i s .

Question 29
Post p l a n n i n g e v a l u a t i o n was
concerned m a i n l y w i t h s e n s i t i v i t y
analysis
to
unknown
des i gn
p a r a m e t e r s such a s :
safe y i e l d o f
t h e a q u i f e r ; c a p a c i t y o f w e l l s ; peak
month demand;
a v a i l a b i l i t y of
the
n a t i o n a l system; e t c .

E A S I E H N NEGEV W A l E R - S U P P L Y

5 .CL

SY',II:M

I I F V t ~ II I P ' u t t I I

Project

'51

Ill ML.

(fJllV.

I91IlJ)

-98-

-99-

LONG TERM INTEGRATED PLANNING OF THE

DRINKING WATER SUPPLY IN THE PROVINCE OF
SOUTH HOLLAND (THE NETHERLANDS): IODZH

BY
A.H.M. Bresser,
National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Hygiene (RIVMI
Project Leader of the Second Stage of the IODZH Study

1.

i
I

Introduction

Water s u p p l y i n t h e P r o v i n c e o f
S o u t h H o l l a n d (The N e t h e r l a n d s )
is
p r e s e n t l y d e a l t w i t h b y 30 w a t e r
companies.
The
1980 demand
for
p i p e d w a t e r amounts t o 250 x 10 m
/a.
F u t u r e demand
(2010)
w i l l be
between 270 and 420 x 10 m /a w i t h a
b e s t e s t i m a t e o f a b o u t 340 x
10 m
/a.
The p r e s e n t w a t e r s u p p l y s y s t e m
consists o f
8 g r o u n d w a t e r pumping
stations,
16 pumping s t a t i o n s o f
water,
3
for
bankf i 1 t r a t e d
i n f i l t r a t e d s u r f a c e w a t e r by means
o f ponds and 3 p u r i f i c a t i o n p l a n t s
for
reservoir water.
I t w i l l be
necessary t o e n l a r g e p a r t s o f
the
system.
Water companies have made
requests f o r
licenses t o enlarge,
e.g.
the
i n f i l t r a t i o n capacity in
t h e dune a r e a a l o n g t h e c o a s t o f t h e
N o r t h Sea.
This area i s a nature
r e s e r v e o f h i g h q u a l i t y and i s a l s o
partly
used
for
extensive
recreation.
Possible alternatives
f o r t h e s u p p l y a r e t h e use o f e x c e s s
capac i t y
in
reservoirs
and
purification plants,
enlarging the
use o f b a n k f i l t r a t e d w a t e r
or a
rather
new
technique
for
i n f i l t r a t i o n by means o f i n j e c t i o n .
S i n c e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f n a t u r e and
r e c r e a t i o n i n t e r e s t s b o t h demand a
d e c r e a s e o f i n f i l t r a t i o n i n t h e dune
area
also,
alternatives with a
r e d u c e d i n f i l t r a t i o n c a p a c i t y have
been s t u d i e d .
The s t u d y has been c e n t e r e d
a r o u n d and g u i d e d b y an e x t e n s i v e
system s t u d y u s i n g b o t h s i m u l a t i o n
and o p t i m i z a t i o n as t e c h n i q u e s
(1).
Supporting
studies
have
been
undertaken
in
the
fields
of

groundwater hydrology ( e s p e c i a l l y i n
the
dune
area
and
for
b a n k f i 1 t r a t i on) ,
dose
effect
r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n w a t e r s u p p l y and
nature,
between
recreation
and
n a t u r e and b e t w e e n w a t e r s u p p l y a n d
recreation,
water
qual i t y ,
r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e s u p p l y system and
costs.
S u r v e y s have been made o f
t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n of
nature,
r e c r e a t i o n and w a t e r s u p p l y .
A t t h e f i n a l stage o f t h e study
of
the
most
of
the
results
substudies
have been
incorporated
w i t h i n t h e s i m u l a t i o n model.

I n t h e N e t h e r l a n d s p l a n n i n g of
t h e water
supply consists o f t h r e e
(30
forms.
The l o n g t e r m p l a n n i n g
years period)
f o r t h e c o u n t r y as a
whole
i s done
at
the
central
government.
Medium t e r m p l a n n i n g
(10 y e a r s p e r i o d ) i s a combined t a s k
of
r e g i o n a l government ( p r o v i n c e s )
and t h e w a t e r c o m p a n i e s .
Short
term
planning
i s done b y w a t e r c o m p a n i e s .
The IOOZH-study i s a c o m b i n a t i o n o f
l o n g t e r m and medium t e r m p l a n n i n g
so b o t h t h e
on a r e g i o n a l
scale,
central
government
and
the
p r o v i n c i a l government w e r e
involved
and t o o k
part
in
the
Steering
Comm i t t e e .
The s t u d y has been c a r r i e d o u t
i n two s t a g e s .
The f i r s t was ended
1981 w i t h a n
Interim
i n August
(2).
With t h i s r e p o r t the
Report
part
s t u d y f o c u s s e d on t h e c e n t r a l
o f t h e p r o b l e m , c u t back b o t h i n t h e
r e g i o n u n d e r s t u d y and a l t e r n a t i v e s
c o n s i d e r e d and w e n t i n t o m o r e d e t a i l
of
the
for
the remaining p a r t
problem.
The f i n a l s t a g e ended i n

-100-

A u g u s t 1983 w i t h
the Final
Report
(3)
p r e s e n t i n g an o v e r v i e w o f t h e
s t u d y as a w h o l e , d e s c r i b i n g b r i e f l y
t h e methods u s e d and f o c u s s i n g on
conclusions regarding the possible
s o l u t i o n s f o r t h e development o f t h e
w a t e r s u p p l y , r e c r e a t i o n i n t h e dune
area
and
nature
preservation
(regeneration included).

2. Planning Stage 1:
Project
initiation and Preliminary Planning
Question 1
The
system
i nvo 1v e d
I S
i n f 1 uenced
by
two
planning
procedures:
o n w a t e r s u p p l y and on
physical
planning.
The
central
government
sets up a long term
p l a n n i n g scheme
("Structuurschema")
w h i c h i s w o r k e d o u t i n 10-year p l a n s
f o r t h e w a t e r s u p p l y and i n s p e c i f i c
p r o j e c t s such as pumping s t a t i o n s
and p u r i f i c a t i o n p l a n t s .
The
long
t e r m p l a n n i n g scheme i-s a l s o w o r k e d
plans f o r
regions
out i n physical
and d e s t i n a t i o n p l a n s f o r c e r t a i n
areas.
Along b o t h l i n e s p l a n n i n g i s a
continuous process w i t h l i c e n s e s f o r
actually
bui l d i n g
projects.
L i c e n s e s have t o f i t
i n the
long
t e r m schemes w h i c h m o s t l y p r o v i d e
f o r boundary c o n d i t i o n s .
Along b o t h
l i n e s a number o f p l a n s and r e q u e s t s
f o r l i c e n s e s came u p w i t h r e s p e c t t o
t h e same a r e a and s y s t e m .
I n order
to
provide
for
an
integrated
s o l u t i o n o f t h e complicated problem
for
water
supply,
r e c r e a t i o n and
n a t u r e , t h e s t u d y has been i n i t i a t e d
by t h e former N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e f o r
Water S u p p l y and a p p o i n t e d
y
the
Ministries
involved
and
the
Provincial
Government
of
South
Holland.

Question 2.
I n t h e s t u d y a d i v i s o n had
been
made
between
gove nmen t a 1
p l a n n i n g and t h e t e c h n i c a l p l a n n i n g
procedures.
The f i r s t has
been
d e a l t w i t h b y t h e S t e e r i n g Committee
whose members a r e t o p - a d m i n i s t r a t o r s
of
central
and
provincial

government.
The t e c h n i c a l
part of
the
planning
(i.e.
the study
i t s e l f ) has been c a r r i e d o u t b y 7
research i n s t i t u t e s
under
superv i s i o n o f RID (now RIVM). The i n s t i t u t e s are: D e l f t
H y d r a u l i c s Laboratory, National I n s t i t u t e for
Water
Supply,National I n s t i t u t e f o r Nature
Studies, I n s t i t u t e for Environmental
S t u d i e s and H e a l t h TNO,
Research
I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y KIWA, t h e
P r ov i nc i a 1
Phys i c a 1
P I ann i ng
Department
and
the
Centre f o r
of
the
Environment
Stud i es
University of
Leiden.
The p e o p l e
c a r r y i n g o u t t h e study almost a l l
had
an
academic
degree.
The
disciplines
varied
from
mathemat i c i a n s and
eng i n e e r s
to
on
biologists
and
experts
r e c r e a t i ona 1
behaviour.
The
o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e s t u d y have been
formulated i n the f i r s t stage o f the
s t u d y and w e r e t a k e n f r o m p u b l i c l y
accepted p l a n n i n g procedures.
The
I n t e r i m Report which contains the
o b j e c t i v e s and t h e f i r s t s c r e e n i n g
o f a l t e r n a t i v e s appeared i n 1981 and
in
public,
as
was
discussed
t h e Final Report, issued
i n Summer

1984.
Question 3
The m o s t
important c r i t e r i o n
f o r i n i t i a t i n g t h e s t u d y was t h a t
u n t i l that
time a l l
attempts
to
r e a c h agreement o n t h e use o f t h e
dune a r e a h a d f a l e d , w h i l e w i t h i n a
l i m i t e d number o f
years
actual
o b e t a k e n on t h i s
decisions
had
subject

Question 4
C o n s t r a i n t s posed o n t h e s t u d y
were:
l i m i t e d t o the province of
S o u t h H o l l a n d , no d i r e c t i n v o l v e m e n t
of
the
interest
groups
(i.e.
watercompanies,
environmentalists
a c t i o n groups),
use o n l y e x i s t i n g
data.
These c o n s t r a i n t s were posed
by t h e g o v e r n i n g bodies.
The f i r s t
constraint
(areal)
d i d n o t cause
serious
problems a l t h o u g h s l i g h t
deviations
f r o m i t w e r e made w h i c h
were
acceptable.
The second
constraint
(no w a t e r c o m p a n i e s
or

-101-

interest
groups
i nvolved)
caused
many
more
problems.
I t
was
discussed
extensively
and
a
compromi s e
between
the
project
d i r e c t o r s and t h e p r o j e c t team was
techn ica 1
data
and
found :
discussions
on t e c h n i c a l
matters
with the
interest
parties
were
allowed,
thus p r o v i d i n g a b e t t e r
c o n n e c t i o n between t h e s t u d y
and
real ity.
Still,
even
after
f i n i s h i n g the study, t h i s c o n s t r a i n t
poses
serious
problems
because
i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f proposed s o l u t i o n s
needs
coopor a t i on
between
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and w a t e r companies.
The t h i r d c o n s t r a i n t a l s o caused
s e v e r e p r o b l e m s because d a t a on t h e
p r e s e n t s t a t e o f n a t u r e i n t h e dune
area
was
insufficient
t o make
p r e d i c t i o n s on p o s s i b l e e f f e c t s due
to alterations
i n the i n f i l t r a t i o n
system.
T h i s has b e e n s o l v e d a t t h e
c o s t o f a b o u t a y e a r e x t r a t i m e and
s e v e r a l man y e a r s e x t r a l a b o u r .

Question 5
I n t h e system a n a l y s i s p a r t o f
t h e s t u d y a t f i r s t t h e r e was an
e x t e n s i v e d i s c u s s i o n on t h e methods
to
be
used:
optimization
or
simulation.
Both
methods
were
adopted
with
emphasis
on
the
simulation.
This
decision
was
r e a c h e d o n a t e c h n i c a l l e v e l and w a s
a p p r o v e d b y t h e S t e e r i n g Committee
a f t e r a b r i e f i n g by the study
team.
On methods t o be u s e d i n s u b s t u d i e s
the study
team d e c i d e d p r i m a r i l y ,
and
made a p r o p o s i t i o n f o r
the
S t e e r i n g Committee f o r
approval
of
financial
a s p e c t s and manpower.
On
some
occasions
the
Steering
Commi t t e e changed
proposals,
in
e x t e n t o r c o n t e n t , m o s t l y because o f
f i n a n c i a l reasons.

3.
Planning Stage
Collection

2:

Data

Question 6
The s u b s t u d i e s made u s e
of
t h e i r own d a t a b a s e s
and p r o v i d e d
data f o r
t h e s y s t e m s t u d y and f o r
other substudies.
The h y d r o l o g i c a l
s t u d y used o b s e r v a t i o n s o f l e v e l s o f
p h r e a t i c g r o u n d w a t e r and o f heads i n
semi
c o n f i n e d groundwater
(annual

averages
have
been u s e d ) .
The
v a l i d a t i o n o f t h e m o d e l s was
done
with
data
of
three
years.
Hydrogeological
d a t a were d e r i v e d
from pumping t e s t s and v a r i o u s o t h e r
in
hydrology,
sources.
Changes
c a l c u l a t e d w i t h t h e m o d e l s as a n n u a l
averages
i n a steady s t a t e f o r a
number o f s i t u a t i o n s , a r e i n p u t s f o r
effect calculation.
T r a v e l t i m e s of
w a t e r t o d r a i n s and w e l l s w e r e a l s o
calculated
providing
data
for
p r o t e c t i o n zones and f o r m i n g
input
for
p h y s i c a l p l a n n i n g and f o r t h e
r e c r e a t i o n study.
Input data f o r
the nature studies are surveys o f
p l a n t s and v e g e t a t i o n
over
the
p r o v i n c e as a w h o l e ( t h i s h a d been
out
ear 1 ie r
by
the
c a r r i ed
P 1 a n n i ng
Provincial
Phys i ca 1
D e p a r t m e n t e x c e p t f o r t h e dune a r e a :
t h a t s u r v e y was p a r t o f t h e s t u d y ) .
A l s o numbers o f b r e e d i n g p a i r s o f
b i r d s , gathered continuously b y b i r d
For
w a t c h i n g groups,
were used.
recreation,
i n p u t d a t a were c o u n t s
of v i s i t o r s
i n c e r t a i n areas a t
several
times,
and
interviews.
Water
quality of
t h e sources of
g r o u n d w a t e r was measured once i n t h e
s t u d y as a check
on
available
information
(annua 1
sampl i ng)
Water
q u a l i t y o f r i v e r s i s measured
continuously a t several points along
t h e r i v e r s R h i n e and Meuse f o r
a
1.ong p e r i o d .
The d a t a o f t h e p e r i o d
1975-1980
( i n c l .)
have been u s e d .
For r e l i a b i l i t y ,
d a t a on f a i l u r e s
are
scarce
so m o s t l y e s t i m a t e s
have been made.
The p r e d i c t i o n on
f u t u r e demands w e r e
based
upon
demographical d a t a from t h e C e n t r a l
Bureau o f
the
Census
and
the
Provincial
Phys i c a 1
P 1 a n n i ng
Department.
Data
on i n d u s t r i a l
d e v e l o p m e n t were o b t a i n e d from t h e
N a t i ona 1
Phys i c a 1
Planning
Department.
Data o n s p e c i f i c w a t e r
c o n s u m p t i o n were o b t a i n e d f r o m an
earlier
study
of
the National
Water
Supply.
A l l
I n s t i t u t e for
water consumption d a t a a r e y e a r l y
averages.
Water c o n s u m p t i o n i n t h e
W e s t l a n d h o r t i c u l t u r e a r e a has b e e n
c a l c u l a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f d a t a from
the h o r t i c u l t u r e research
institute
The s y s t e m
and v a r y w i t h i n a y e a r .
s t u d y uses f i g u r e s
of
the present
s i t u a t i o n (lay-out, capacities, cost
figures,
e t c . ) o f t h e supply system
as o b t a i n e d f r o m t h e w a t e r c o m p a n i e s .

-102-

Question 10

Question 7
Not o n l y
e x i s t i n g d a t a have
been used.
Surveys o f n a t u r e v a l u e
h a v e been made ( c o u n t i n g p l a n t s and
v e g e t a t i o n t y p e s o v e r 600 h e c t a r e s
of
dune a r e a ) .
Recreation a c t i v i t y
was c o u n t e d .
Analyses
of
water
samples
from g r o u n d w a t e r
pumping
s t a t i o n s w e r e made.
Dose-effect
r e l a t i o n s have been e s t a b l i s h e d f r o m
l i t e r a t u r e and f r o m o t h e r r e s e a r c h .
I n other f i e l d s
the
inventory
of
already
e x i s t i n g d a t a t o o k much
effort.
Forecasts
for
t h e demand
and f o r w a t e r q u a l i t y i n g r o u n d w a t e r
and r i v e r s w e r e i n p u t s i n t h e models
and had t o b e g e n e r a t e d w i t h t h e a i d
of h i s t o r i c a l data.

Question 8
Formal OR t e c h n i q u e s w e r e n o t
used
to
d e t e r m i ne
the
data
collection
scheme.
P r a c t ic a l
this
considerations
dom i na t e d
a s p e c t , a i d e d b y some a n a l y s i s .
The
water
r e s o u r c e s management models
used
are
deterministic.
The
a v a i l a b l e and o b t a i n a b l e d a t a d i d
seldom a l l o w f o r
a
statistical
approach.
Data c o l l e c t i o n on t h e
p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n f o r n a t u r e posed a
problem.
S e v e r a l p o s s i b l e ways o f
calculating effects of vegetation
were
available,
all
requiring
d i f f e r e n t data sets.
Since
the
survey o f
t h e dune a r e a had t o be
made i n an e a r l y s t a g e o f t h e s t u d y
t h e method had t o be d e c i d e d upon.
A
smal 1
computer
programme
( s i m u l a t i o n ) was u s e d t o compare t h e
different
methods and t o d e c i d e on
t h e way i n w h i c h t h e s u r v e y had t o
b e c a r r i e d out.

Question 9
No s p e c i f i c programme has been
s e t up t o assess t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f
But t h e d a t a
t h e d a t a b a s e s used.
on t h e survey of t h e n a t u r e values
i n t h e dunes had t o f i t i n a d a t a
base o f n a t u r e values i n t h e r e s t o f
t h e province which already existed.
T h e programmes f o r p r o c e s s i n g t h e s e
d a t a had t o b e a l t e r e d f o r
this
purpose.

A n a l y s i s o f h i s t o r i c a l d a t a on
w a t e r q u a l i t y o f t h e r i v e r s has been
done
with
multiple
regression
analysis f o r
a
l a r g e number
of
parameters
us i ng
a
standard
( 4 ) . E x p e r t s ' v i e w s were
programme
used on s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s as d a t a ,
sometimes as d o s e - e f f e c t r e l a t i o n s ,
sometimes as w e i g h t i n g f a c t o r s
in
combining
criteria.
These v i e w s
by
interviews,
were
sol ic i t e d
sometimes m a k i n g u s e o f t h e Saaty-De
Graan method ( 5 ) .

Planning Stage 3:
Formulation and Screening
of Project Alternatives
4.

I n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r case t h e
s t u d y compared a l t e r n a t i v e s
i n two
stages:
s c r e e n i n g based o n r o u g h
leaving
comparison of a l t e r n a t i v e s ,
out
o b v i o u s bad ones,
and t h e n
further
detailing
of
remaining
a l t e r n a t i v e s and c a r e f u l
comparison
and
judging
of
these
against
objectives.
The q u e s t i o n s i n t h i s
chapter w i l l
b e answered f o r
the
first
stage.
The d e v e l o p m e n t o f
methods t o b e used i n b o t h s t a g e s o f
t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s was p a r t o f
t h i s f i r s t stage o f
t h e s t u d y and
resources
u s e d c a n n o t s i m p l y be
d i v i d e d i n t o resources
for
the
planning
and f o r d e v e l o p m e n t o f
methods.
So t h e
sum
will
be
presented.

Question 1 1
I t t o o k a b o u t two y e a r s ,
15
manyears and 1.5 m i l l i o n g u i l d e r s
(about $600,000) t o complete t h e
f i r s t stage o f t h e study.
By t h a t
t i m e much had a l r e a d y been p r e p a r e d
for
the
final
stage.
Severa 1
computers
had
been
used.
The
s i m u l a t i o n model v e r s i o n 1 was r u n
a t , t h e computer o f D e l f t H y d r a u l i c
The
Laboratory
( i n Dynamo I I I ) .
second v e r s i o n , a l s o i n Dynamo I l l ,
was
on
the
computer
of
IBM
Zoetermeer.
The t h i r d v e r s i o n i n
F o r t r a n was r u n on t h e computer o f
ENR i n P e t t e n .
B o t h DHL and RID
had a d i r e c t l i n e t o t h i s machine.

-103-

The o p t i m i z a t i o n model a l s o r a n o n
ENR
computer
with
the
the
PDP-minicomputer o f RID as t e r m i n a l .
The l a r g e h y d r o l o g i c a l models r a n i n
Petten,
w h i l e t h e s m a l l e r ones r a n
on t h e PDP a t RID.
The d a t a o n
nature
were
processed
on
the
computer o f t h e P r o v i n c i a l P l a n n i n g
Department.
The t o t a l
e f f o r t had
been s p r e a d o v e r w o r k i n g teams whose
1 eader s
p a r t ic ipated
in
a
c o o r d i n a t i o n team under t h e p r o j e c t
1 eader

Question 12
In s t i t u t ional
support
was
p r o v i d e d b y t h e S t e e r i n g Committee
and t h e A d v i s o r y Committee and b y a
on
Legal
and
Task
Force
Instituti.onal
Aspects.
Representatives
from t h e m i n i s t r i e s
i n v o l v e d and f r o m t h e p r o v i n c e t o o k
p a r t i n these committees.
A l l along
t h e s t u d y d e c i s i o n s had t o be made
on aspects o f
finances,
screening,
sometimes methods t o b e used, t i m e
etc.
Most d e c i s i o n s c o u l d b e t a k e n
by the p r o j e c t
leader
(within the
b u d g e t and t h e p r o j e c t programme).
M a j o r d e c i s i o n s were t a k e n by t h e
S t e e r i n g Committee w i t h t h e a d v i c e
o f the project
leader
and
the
A d v i s o r y Committee.
Some o f
the
intermediate results of
the study
f o u n d t h e i r way
into
provincial
p o l i c i e s on w a t e r s u p p l y a f t e r t h e
I n t e r i m R e p o r t had been p r e s e n t e d .

Question 73
T h e r e was no d i r e c t
public
involvement
i n t h e study a f t e r t h e
s t a r t and b e f o r e t h e
Interimreport
had
been
presented.
The
l n t e r i m r e p o r t was d i s t r i b u t e d w i d e l y
and d i s c u s s e d i n a p u b l i c m e e t i n g .

Question 74
I n principle a l l projects for
d r i n k i n g water
s u p p l y which were
technically
feasible
have
been
s t u d i e d t o some e x t e n t .
Not a l l
c o m b i n a t i o n s o f p r o j e c t s have b e e n
studied.
I n an e a r l y s t a g e o f t h e
study
a
1 i m i ted
number
of
c o n n e c t i o n s between s u p p l y p o i n t s
and demand nodes were p r o p o s e d and

d i scussed
with
the
Steering
Committee.
The l n t e r i m r e p o r t g a v e a
screening of the a l t e r n a t i v e s .
The
r e m a i n i n g ones were s t u d i e d i n much
more d e t a i l i n t h e second s t a g e o f
the study.

Question 75
D e c i s i o n makers
i n t h i s case
are the Provincial
Government and
t h e two M i n i s t r i e s
of
Physical
Planning,
H o u s i n g and E n v i r o n m e n t a l
Management and o f
A g r i c u l t u r e and
Fishery
(recreation
and
nature
preservation
i ncluded)
Civi 1
servants of
these bodies form the
S t e e r i n g Committee.
Proposals f o r
S c r e e n i n g and a l t e r n a t i v e s were made
b y t h e s t u d y team and d i s c u s s e d i n
the
Steering
Committee.
The
suggestions
for
screening
were
supported
by
trade-offs
between
c r i t e r i a such as c o s t s ,
drinking
w a t e r q u a l i t y and damage t o n a t u r e
and b y a l t e r n a t i v e c o m b i n a t i o n s o f
projects with the effects of
all
c r i t e r i a.

Question 76
The c o n s t r a
d i s c u s s e d a t ques
t h e y c o u l d be r e
w i t h the Steering

n t s were a l r e a d y
ion 4 .
Sometimes
axed. i n d i s c u s s i o n
Committee.

Question 77
The model f o r s i m u l a t i o n o f t h e
development
of
the water
supply
s y s t e m (DRISIM) was d e v e l o p e d b y DHL
and R I D .
I t was f i r s t w r i t t e n i n
DYNAMO, a t r y as made i n A C S L and i t
was f i n a l l y
r e w r i t t e n i n FORTRAN.
The o p t i m i z a t i o n model was w r i t t e n
a r o u n d t h e APEX s t a n d a r d LP- r o u t i n e
i n Petter.
The
a v a i l a b l e a t ENR
d e c i s i o n models o f
S a a t y - d e Graan
a t RID.
had been d e v e l o p e d e a r l i e r
The h y d r o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s made u s e o f
s t a n d a r d m o d e l s a v a i l a b l e and m o s t l y
developed
b y R ID
(TR I S E ,
MESH)
P r o c e s s i n g o f n a t u r e v a l u e s has been
done by t h e P r o v i n c i a l
Planning
wi th
i t s own
Department
(PPD)
existing
programs.
For
the
c a l c u l a t i o n o f e f f e c t s on v e g e t a t i o n
and b i r d s t h e DHL t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e
PPD and R I D d e v e l o p e d an a l g o r i t h m
on
the
computer
of
PPD.

-104-

The
multiple
correlation
of
w a t e r q u a l i t y was p e r f o r m e d w i t h t h e
COMPANprogram,
developed e a r l i e r
at RID.

Question 18
The s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n
model have been t e s t e d
with the
historical
development o f t h e w a t e r
supply
system.
Calculation
of
e f f e c t s c o u l d seldom
be
tested
because
all
available
d a t a on
effects of
historical
developments
o f t h e system were used t o d e t e r m i n e
dose-effect
relations.
The e f f e c t
c a l c u l a t i o n s t h e r e f o r e d i d n o t have
an a b s o l u t e meaning b u t have o n l y
been u s e d i n a c o m p a r a t i v e way
in
t h e f i r s t phase o f t h e s t u d y .
The
h y d r o l o g i c a l models had been t e s t e d
already
(standard programs).
The
models w e r e c a l i b r a t e d w i t h d a t a o n
heads and g r o u n d w a t e r t a b l e s
and
with historical situations.

Question 19
I n t h i s stage o f the study
the
"technical"
experts
(= s t u d y team)
made v e r y s p e c i f i c p r o p o s a l s
for
alternatives.
The
s c r e e n i n g of
Steering
Committee d i s c u s s e d t h e
proposals,
adjusted
them
when
necessary
( s l i g h t 1 y)
and p r e s e n t e d
the lnterimreport t o the m i n i s t e r s
i nvo 1ved
and
the
P r o v i nc i a 1
Government.
Sever a 1
different
advisory
committees
on p h y s i c a l
p l a n n i n g and e n v i r o n m e n t , t h e w a t e r
companies,
a c t i o n g r o u p s and o t h e r
i n t e r e s t e d p e o p l e were a s k e d
to
comment o n t h e r e p o r t .
A public
presentation
has
been
held.
Governmental d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s a d o p t e d
t h i s i n t e r m e d i a t e r e s u l t and a g r e e d
o n t h e second s t a g e o f t h e s t u d y .

Question 20
Yes, i t c e r t a i n l y has b e e n an
interdisciplinary planning e f f o r t ,
and t h e m i x was r a t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e .
The
study
team
suggested
the
an i n s t i t u t i o n a l
i n c o r p o r a t i o n of
s u b s t u d y , b u t t h e S t e e r i n g Committee
this.
The m o s t
d i d n o t a l l o w for
d i s a p p o i n t i n g t h i n g has been t h a t no
watercompanies
were a l l o w e d t o t a k e
actual p a r t i n the planning process.

The c o m b i n a t i o n o f b i o l o g i s t s
and t e c h n i c i a n s p r o v e d t o be v e r y
worthwhile f o r both.
Understanding
of
each o t h e r grew w i t h t h e s t u d y
by
the
intensive
espec i a 1 1 y
d i s c u s s i o n s i n t h e s t u d y team.
This
resulted i n
solutions
for
the
development
of
the water
supply
system,
recreation
and
nature
preservation
that
c a n be named
harmonious, d e s p i t e g r e a t c o n f l i c t s
a b o u t t h e same m a t t e r i n t h e p a s t .
So a j o i n t p l a n n i n g p r o c e d u r e seems
to
be
much
better
than o n l y
calculating effects of
plans a f t e r
t h e d e s i g n o f a l i m i t e d number o f
a l t e r n a t i v e s (which i s t h e case
in
e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact assessment)

5.
Planning
Stage
Development
of Final
Project Specifications

4:

I n t h i s chapter o n l y the f i n a l
will
be
stage
of
the
study
discussed,
i.e.
further detailing
the
remaining
a1 t e r n a t i v e s
and
c o m p a r i n g them i n t e r m s o f
the
objectives, analysis o f the f i e l d o f
possible
solutions
and
drawing
conclusions from t h e a n a l y s i s .

Question 27
OR methods have been used as i n
(see c h a p t e r
4,
planning stage 3
q u e s t i ons
11
and
17).
The
o p t i m i z a t i o n model was n o t u s e d t o
d e f i n e an o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n b u t as a
screening
procedure
to
define
obvious
inferior
solutions.
The
s i m u l a t i o n model was u s e d t o f i n d
harmonious s o l u t i o n s .
Most o f t h e
m o d e l l i n g h a s been done b y DHL and
RID.
O f c o u r s e p a r t s o f t h e model
were d e r i v e d from l i t e r a t u r e ,
but
the
literature
i t s e l f was n o t v e r y
u s e f u l . The system s t u d y
team had
advisors a t i t s disposal (Prof.
U.
Shamir and D r .
W.
Wils),
In
d i s c u s s i o n s and e x c e r c i s e s d i f f e r e n t
methods h a v e been e x p l o r e d .
The
main p a r t o f
t h e s y s t e m s t u d y was
t h e s i m u l a t i o n model.
T h i s has been
r e w r i t t e n t h r e e times
i n different
computer
languages.
Dynamo I l l was
the
first
one,
but
the
implementation
of
Fortran
s u b r o u t i n e s i n Dynamo was,
a t that
moment and o n t h e computer t h a t was

-105-

was used, n o t p o s s i b l e .
ACSL was
t h e second one, b u t t h e t r a i n i n g o f
t h e p e o p l e w i t h t h i s l a n g u a g e was
so f i n a l l y t h e model
insufficient,
was w r i t t e n c o m p l e t e l y
i n Fortan.
This
model
was
more
or
less
a
optimized, reducing the c o s t s for
The
r u n by a f a c t o r o f a b o u t 20.
f i n a l version o f D R l S l M i s a very
I t has
u s e f u l one and e a s y t o r u n .
been used,
with alterations
for
s p e c i f i c uses, s i n c e then i n s e v e r a l
So t h e model
other
s t u d i e s a t DHL.
the
c a n e a s i l y b e made t o f i t
problem,
and
except
from
the
necessary
schemat i z a t i o n
of
the
s u p p l y system t h e p r o b l e m does n o t
have t o b e a d j u s t e d t o f i t t h e
model.
The s i m u l a t i o n model grew
w i t h t h e study.
I t i s not possible
t o a s s e s s t h e t i m e used t o c o n s t r u c t
the
model.
Constructing,
r e c o n s t r u c t i n g and r u n n i n g t h e model
were p a r t o f t h e c e n t r a l r o l e o f t h e
system s t u d y i n t h e p r o j e c t as a
whole,
guiding
substudies
and
gradually reaching conclusions.

Question 22
No
specific
cost
benef i t
a n a l y s i s has been made.
Costs were,
together
w i t h a number o f
other
criteria,
an
objective
to
be
minimized
i n b o t h t h e models and i n
t h e s t u d y as a w h o l e .
The c o s t s o f t h e s t u d y
itself
rather
high.
But a t t h e s t a r t
o f t h e s t u d y a p o l i t i c a l impasse had
been r e a c h e d w h i c h had t o be b r o k e n .
I t i s n o t b e be e x p e c t e d t h a t a
t h i s magnitude w i l l
be
study of
c a r r i e d out again.
Parts o f the
s t u d y m i g h t have b e e n done a t
less
costs,
w i t h t h e same i m p a c t o n t h e
conclusions.
are

Question 23

under

R i s k a n a l y s i s o f t h e system
s t u d y formed p a r t o f
the

simulation
model.
-Re1 i a b i 1 i t y
of
t h e supp y s y s t e m w a s o n e o f t h e
c r i t e r i a t h e decision-makers decided
to
obta in
upon,
and
sought
information bout.
Although d a t a on
failures
in
supply
systems a r e
s c a r c e and a s t a t i s t i c a l
approach
shows
great
uncertainties,
the
analysis of
this
i t e m was r a t h e r
successful.
Weak
spots
in
the
system
could
be
identified.
A
Trade-off
between
costs
and
r e l i a b i l i t y i s possible t o a certain
extent.
Discussions on t h i s
item
are continuing.

Questions 24/25

The s i m u l a t i o n model
generates
a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r t h e development o f
the
water
supply
system
and
calculates
t h e e f f e c t s on a number
o f objectives (nature included).
An
alternative
originates
from
a
strategy,
a s c e n a r i o and a s e t o f
t e c h n i c a l assumptions.
A strategy
i n t h i s case
i s a s e t o f maximum
capacities
for
a l l projects
and
pipe1 ines
in
t h e s y s t e m and a
prescript of
the order
i n which
p r o j e c t s s u p p l y w a t e r t o each o f t h e
demand n o d e s .
A scenario i s a set
o f assumptions on developments w h i c h
a r e o u t s i d e t h e system.
( s u c h as
t h e economic d e v e l o p m e n t
or
the
A
l a r g e number o f
energy p r i c e ) .
a l t e r n a t i v e s has been
generated,
each w i t h a l l t h e e f f e c t s c a l c u l a t e d
too.
The a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e p o i n t s i n
a continuum.
The m a i n v a r i a b l e s i n
t h e s t r a t e g i e s w e r e t h e amount o f
surface
i n f i l t r a t i o n i n t h e dunes
and t h e amount o f deep i n f i l t r a t i o n .
When u s i n g t h e s e t w o v a r i a b l e s
as
axes
t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s can b e p u t i n
a f i g u r e where
lines
of
equal
e f f e c t s c a n be d r a w n f o r each o f t h e
criteria
(see Annex
I).
Eleven
o b j e c t i v e s i n a l l were c o n s i d e r e d :

-106-

(1) V e g e t a t i o n

: changes i n a r e a c o v e r e d by v e g e t a t i o n
types: weighted

(2) Landscape

: changes

(3) B i r d s

: changes

(4) Ecosystem

: disturbances a t various levels w i t h i n

ecosystems ( a r e a times t h e i n t e n s i t y )
times t h e importance of a l e v e l w i t h i n
t h e system t i m e s t h e v a l u e o f t h e
e c o s y s t em

(5)

: t h e w e i g h t e d a v e r a g e o f 12 p a r a m e t e r s
( w i t h standard considered)

Water

landscape

of

i n numbers o f b r e e d i n g p a i r s
times t h e v a l u e o f types of b i r d s

qual i t y

(6) Pub1 i c

(7)

i n the value
(area times weight)

Security

: t h e judgement
of
source-purification

health

of

experts
systems

p r o d u c t i o n : t h e judgement
o f experts
s o u r c e - p u r i f i c a t i o n systems

of

of

(8) R e l i a b i l i t y o f s u p p l y

: the c a l c u l a t e d non-deliverance
p r o m i l l a g e of t h e supply

(9) P r o d u c t i o n c o s t s

: i n cents per m3 d e l i v e r e d
p l a n n i n g h o r i z o n (2010)

at

(10) P r e s e n t v a l u e o f t o t a l
costs

: total
p 1 ann

the
od

system

in

the

(11) P r e s e n t v a l u e o f
i nvestments

: .total
plann

the
od

system

in

the

Vegetation,
c o s t s and
water
were
considered
the
qual i t y
"leading" objectives.
T h i s does n o t
mean t h a t
the other objectives are
unimportant, b u t rather
that
these
three
are,
under
the
present
circumstances,
t h e ones w h i c h m o s t
determine
the
best
compromise
s o l u t ion.
For each o f t h e c r i t e r i a f i v e
c l a s s e s have b e e n i d e n t i f i e d v a r y i n g
from A (= i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n w i t h t h e
(=
goals f o r the objective)
to E
completely
i n l i n e w i t h the goals).

as

the

The c l a s s e s h a v e been d e r i v e d f r o m
p o l i c y documents and i n d i s c u s s i o n
with
the
Steering
Commi t t e e .
C o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e f i g u r e s f o r each
c r i t e r i o n showed
an
area
with
a l t e r n a t i v e s where no o b j e c t i v e was
contradicted
(except
landscape)
These
s o l u t i ons
were
called
r e a s o n a b l y good s o l u t i o n s .
Within
t h i s a r e a a more l i m i t e d number o f
so c a l l e d harmoneous s o l u t i o n s c o u l d
b e i d e n t i f i e d where t h e s c o r e s on
t h e major o b j e c t i v e s
(vegetation,
c o s t s , w a t e r q u a l i t y ) were p o s i t i v e
II).
Except
from
(annex

-107-

i n f i l t r a t i o n , w a t e r can be s u p p l i e d
or
from
from
bank
filtration
reservoirs.
In the alternatives of
i n which
annex I and I I t h e o r d e r
these
projects
are
used
was
standard.
D i f f e r e n t s t r a t e g i e s have been
investigated.
Annex I l l shows some
results
i n o b j e c t i v e space,
the
d e c i d i n g o b j e c t i v e s b e i n g c o s t s and
v e g e t a t i o n a s can b e d e r i v e d f r o m
t h e annexes
I and ( I . F o r m u l a t i o n
o f conclusions from t h i s analysis
was done
i n discussion with
the
S t e e r i n g Committee.
The g r a p h i c a l
presentation (together w i t h tables)
i n the
p r o v e d t o be v e r y u s e f u l
discussions.
The o p t i m i z a t i o n model
was n o t u s e d i n t h i s phase d e s p i t e
of
the
bui I t - i n
possibi 1 i t y
mu1 t i - o b j e c t i v e o p t i m i z a t i o n b e c a u s e
the
d e c i s i o n process i t s e l f
was
i m p o r t a n t and no w e i g h t s c o u l d b e
e s t a b l i s h e d beforehand.
Besides t h e
results
of
t h i s model w e r e
too
aggregate.
The d i r e c t d i s c u s s i o n s
between
analysts
and
Steering
Committee
proved
to
be
very
successful.
Graphics
are
very
useful
i n t h i s discussion.
The
a n a l y s i s has been s u p p o r t e d b y an
e x t e n s i v e s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s on
variables
i n strategies, scenarios
and t e c h n i c a l d a t a s e t .
One o f
the
methods u s e d i n t h i s i s w i t h META
mode 1 s
(6) .
This
p r o v i ded
i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e n e c e s s a r y w i d t h
of
the
classes
used
and
the
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between a l t e r n a t i v e s .
I t a l s o p r o v i d e d a sound b a s i s f o r
discussions
with
the
Steering
Committee.

Question 26
The d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s
accepted
t h e r e p o r t as a base f o r f u t u r e
p o l i c i e s . They added
institutional

and l e g a l " i n f o r m a t i o n " t o i t .

The
c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h e s t u d y a r e - among
suggestions
for
the
others
capacities of
p r o j e c t s t h a t should
b e l i c e n s e d a t a maximum.
Decisions
on t h e l i c e n s e s have n o t been t a k e n
y e t . (January 1984).
The s t u d y d i d
n o t end up w i t h an " o p t i m a l "
soluti o n . T h e r e i s no such t h i n g as " t h e "
o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n i n t h i s case.

Questions 27/28
The d e s i g n o f a f i n a l p l a n
not p a r t o f t h i s study.

was

Question 29
Not y e t

( J a n u a r y 1984)

6 . Planning Stage 5:
Design

Project

The d e s i g n o f s u p p l y p i p e s and
p r o j e c t s was n o t p a r t o f t h e j o b .
Watercompanies
themelves
design
parts of
t h e s u p p l y system w i t h i n
the constraints of
licenses
and
funds.
The s i m u l a t i o n model D R l S l M
i s used p r e s e n t l y
t o the further
d e s i g n o f p a r t s o f t h i s system.

Acknowledgement
The s t a r t o f
t h e p r o j e c t and
the f i r s t
s t a g e o f t h e s t u d y have
been g u i d e d b y t h e f i r s t p r o j e c t
leader
Mr.
F.
Langeweg o f R I D .
W i t h o u t h i s d r i v i n g power t h e s t u d y
w o u l d p r o b a b l y h a v e ended a t i t s
beginning w i t h a l o t o f
confusion
between d i s c i p l i n e s .
The s t u d y has
been s u p p o r t e d by
the
S t e e r i ng
P.
Committee
w i t h chairman M r .
V e r k e r k and s e c r e t a r y
Dr.
H.
de
Boois.
The p o s i t i v e a p p r o a c h o f
t h i s committee t o t h e problems b o t h
i n management
and
in
contents
l a r g e l y c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e success.

-108-

Literature
1)

Bresser,
A.H.M.,
and
W.K.
Pluij m ,
July
1981
Multi
o b j e c t i v e p l a n n i n g o f t h e water
supply f o r
the
Province
of
South-Holland
(The N e t h e r l a n d s )
Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e I F O R S ' 8 1
C o n f e r e n c e i n Hamburg, 1981.

4)

Graan,
J.G.
de,
R.J.A.
D u j a r d i n and J .
Koster,
1980
of
COMPAN;
a
User
manual
computer
p r og r amme
for
multi-linear regression analysis
based on e i g e n v e c t o r s .
National
I n s t i t u t e f o r Water Sup,ply (RID)

2)

Anonymous,
1981
lnterimreport
(in
Dutch)
Report
by
the
Steering
Comm i t t e e
I ODZH
National
I n s t i t u t e f o r Water
Supply ( R I D )

5)

Graan,
J.G.
de,
1978
Some
e x t e n s i o n s t o t h e d e c i s i o n model
o f Saaty N a t i o n a l l n s i t u t e f o r
Water S u p p l y ( R I D )

6)
3)

Anonymous, 1983 F i n a l r e p o r t ( i n
Dutch)
R e p o r t by t h e S t e e r i n g
Comm i t t e e
I ODZH
N a t i ona 1
I n s t i t u t e f o r Water S u p p l y (RID)

Kleijnen
J.P.C.,
1981
Statistical
aspects
of
simulation:
an u p d a t e d s u r v e y
T i lburg University

-109-

ANNEX 1A

Lines of equal effects on objectives for entire alternatives

(for legends see Annex 1B )

10
effects o n vegetation

110 120 130 140 150 I60 170 180 190 1100 1110 1120 113(

capacity of deep infiltration

effects on landscape

lo l 0

130

loo im Iso

effects on birds

effects on w a t e r q u a l i t y

effects on e n t i r e ecosystems

effects on p u b l i c health

Lo ln0 lg0 l o0 l l0 1120113

capacity of deep infiltration

-110-

ANNEX 1 B

Lines of e q u a l e f f e c t s on objectives for entire alternatives

security o f production

production costs

reliability o f the supply

Legends
A = in conflict with the objective
B = some conflicting points
C = neutral or indifferent
D = some positive points
E = in full accordance with the objective
capacities in millions of rn3/a

present value o f investments

-111-

ANNEX 2

Selection of harmonious alternatives

capacity of deep infiltration

(in millions of m3/a)
Legends

lmi Harmonious solutions

m
u

Reasonably good solutions

-112-

ANNEX 3

Comparison of alternative strategies on costs and

vegetation effects

25
-

20
-

Alternative 7
Capacity surface infiltration = 50 million m3/a
Capacity deep infiltration = 40 million m3/a

Additional strategies

---.-

----

no deep infiltration; standard strategy

standard strategy + deep infiltration
use of reservoirs + existing plants
use of bankfiltration
new purification plant

present value of total costs (million guilders)

-113-

POST EVALUATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS

IN THE MAUMEE RIVER BASIN LEVEL-B STUDY

BY
Yacov Y. HAIMES

1.

Professor and Principal Investigator of the

Case Western Reserve University's portion
of the study.

KAI SUNG

Ph.D. student at the Systems Engineering

Department, Case Western Reserve
University,Cleveland, Ohio.

Leonard T. CROOK

Executive and Planning Director, Great Lakes

Basin Commission. Ann Arbor, Michigan;
also the supervisor of the Study Manager.

David GREGORKA

Senior Planner and Assistant to the Study

Manager, Great Lakes Basin Commission,
Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Introduction
A
hierarchical-multiobjective
m o d e l i n g and o p t i m i z a t i o n e f f o r t has
been a p p l i e d t o L e v e l - B p l a n n i n g
in
the
Maumee
River
Basin.
The
p r i n c p a l e s . and s t a n d a r d s f o r w a t e r
and r e l a t e d l a n d r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g
prepared
b y t h e Water R e s o u r c e s
C o u n c i l and a d o p t e d b y Congress o n
10 September 1973 i d e n t i f y two m a j o r
o b j e c t i v e s i n such p l a n n i n g :

1.
To
enhance
national
economic d e v e l o p m e n t by i n c r e a s i n g
the value o f the Nation's output o f
goods and s e r v i c e s ,
and i m p r o v i n g
n a t i o n a l economic e f f i c i e n c y .
2 . To enhance t h e q u a l i t y o f
t h e e n v i r o n m e n t b y t h e management,
conservation,
preservation,
c r e a t i on,
restoration,
or
improvement
of
the
qual i t y o f
certain
natural
and
cultural
r e s o u r c e s and e c o l o g i c a l systems.
The o v e r a l l
purpose o f water
is to
and l a n d r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g
promote t h e q u a l i t y o f
life
by

r e f l e c t i n g s o c i e t y ' s preferences for

attaining
the objectives defined
above.
The t h r e e l e v e l s o f
study,
known as L e v e l s A ,
B, and C , a r e
aimed a t i d e n t i f y i n g w a t e r and
land
problems, d e v e l o p i n g p l a n s w h i c h a r e
responsive
t o t h e above o b j e c t i v e s ,
and f i n a l l y ,
implementing
these
plans.
The L e v e l - B s t u d y i n t h e Maumee
River Basin
was
structured
to
i d e n t i f y and e v a l u a t e a l l o f t h e
major w a t e r - r e l a t e d
land resources
p r o b 1 ems.
I t
cons i d e r e d
and
e v a l u a t e d a l l o f t h e measures t h a t
may
resolve
t h e s e p r o b l e m s and
o f f e r e d b o t h an i m m e d i a t e a c t i o n and
for
long-range
action
plan
implementation by v a r i o u s l e v e l s o f
government.
Programs
were
recommended
to
fill
data
and
r e s e a r c h gaps.
In
addition,
a
coordinated
approach
to
needed
d e t a i l e d s t u d i e s o f management and
s t r u c t u r a l programs was
identified
for
implementation a t a l l l e v e l s of
government.
The Maumee s t u d y a r e a
c o n s i s t e d o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5,700,000
acres o f
l a n d and 40,000 a c r e s o f

-114-

-115-

w a t e r s u r f a c e (see Map). More t h a n

h a l f o f the l a t t e r i s the surface o f
Maumee
Bay.
Much o f
the
land,
is
n e a r l y l e v e l or g e n t l y s l o p i n g ,
in agricultural
use.
Because t h e
s o i l has a s l o w p e r m e a b i l i t y
rate,
natural
drainage
problems e x i s t
throughout the basin.

is
Much o f
the b a s i n ' s area
prime a g r i c u l t u r a l
land developed
through drainage of the Great Black
Swamp.
However,
there are
also
substantial
urban
concentrations
centered about t h e c i t i e s o f Toledo,
Lima,
and F o r t Wayne.
Already t h i s
r e p r e s e n t s an e m e r g i n g c o n f l i c t o v e r
optimal a l l o c a t i o n of
land
use:
or
whether
urban
expans i o n
a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d have
i n the f u t u r e .
The most
priority
serious issue a t present i s t h a t o f
water
qual i t y .
Point
sources,
mun i c i pa 1
and
industrial,
and
nonpoint
sources,
urban
and
a g r i c u l t u r a l r u n o f f , both c o n t r i b u t e
heavi 1 y
to
waste
1 oads
S e d i m e n t a t i o n due t o e r o s i o n i s a
problem throughout t h e basin,
which
i s a m p l i f i e d through deposits a t t h e
Maumee
Bay.
Shoreline flooding
remains a troublesome problem,
and
navigational
issues
are
quite
i m p o r t a n t t o t h e economy o f
the
region.
Finally,
quality of
life
c o n s i d e r a t i o n s come i n t o p l a y i n t h e
f i s h and
areas
of
recreation,
w i Id1 i f e
preservation,
and
environmental conservation.

R e l a t e d problems f o r
purposes
of
the
Maumee s t u d y h a v e been
i s o l a t e d and a r e r e f e r r e d t o u n d e r
the
categories o f
land resource
management,
eros ion
and
sedimentation,
water
qual i t y ,
f i s h e r y resources,
wildlife
and
hunting,
outdoor
recreation,
f l o o d i n g , and w a t e r s u p p l y .
P l a n n i n g f o r t h e area
involved
both
pol it i c a l
and
hydrologic
boundaries.
The e n t i r e t h r e e - s t a t e
Maumee R i v e r B a s i n ,
including the
e n t i r e d r a i n a g e a r e a o f Maumee Bay,
was c o n s i d e r e d ,
as were t h e s t a t e
and c o u n t y b o u n d a r i e s encompassing
t h e drainage area.
River
basins
c r o s s s t a t e and c o u n t r y l i n e s .and
a r e g o v e r n e d by a b r o a d a r r a y o f

political institutions.
To m i n i m i z e
complexities
associated
with
crossing p o l i t i c a l
boundaries, the
Maumee s t u d y a r e a was d i v i d e d
into
five
subareas,
each bounded b y
c o u n t y l i n e s and each l y i n g w i t h i n a
A sixth
planning
singl'e
state.
subarea,
Maumee Bay, was u n i q u e i n
it
i s composed e n t i r e l y
of
that
water.
Level-B
planning
studies
attempt
t o c o o r d i n a t e and i n v o l v e
a l l l e v e l s and u n i t s o f
government
r e s p o n s i b l e for water resources i n
t h e area s t u d i e d .
Accordingly,
the
Maumee L e v e l - B S t u d y i v o l v e d s t a t e ,
regional,
1 oca 1
and
federal
agenc i es

The u l t i m a t e o b j e c t i v e was
to
f o r m u l a t e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e management
plan
which
w o u l d a1 l e v i a t e t h e
serious problem of the basin.
The
purpose
of
this
s t u d y was
to
i n v e s t i g a t e some o f
these c r i t i c a l
a r e a s w h i c h must b e f a c e d i n t h e
development
of
such a p l a n .
In
p a r t i c u l a r a r e two b r o a d a r e a s o f
consideration:
(1)
t e c h n i ca 1
p r o b 1 ems,
i nc 1 u d i ng
the
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f g o a l s and d e c i s i o n
variables,
and t h e measurement o f
p a r a m e t e r s and
performance;
(2)
institutional
problems,
including
of
i n f 1 uence
and
area
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , and a v a i l a b i l i t y o f
resources.

2.

P l a n n i n g State 1:
Project
I n i t i a t i o n a n d P r e l i m i n a r y Planning

Question I
Yes.
The Maumee R i v e r B a s i n
Level-B Study i n i t i a t e d by t h e Great
Lakes B a s i n Commission was an e f f o r t
t o s e t up a comprehensive 15-year
(1976-1990) p r o g r a m ( p l a n )
t o deal
with
t h e major problems
i n the
b a s i n , s u c h as w a t e r q u a l i t y and
land use
(including s o i l erosion,
recreational
facilities,
preservation of w i l d l i f e habitat,
flood control, etc.).
The g o a l
of
this
r e s e a r c h was
t o develop a
management framework f o r t h e Maumee
River
Basin's
water
and
land
resources
problems
within
the
guidelines of
t h e Water
Resources
C o u n c i l ' s P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s .

-116-

A t t h e t i m e t h e Maumee R i v e r
B a s i n S t u d y was s t a r t e d , a l e v e l - A
l o n g - t e r m p l a n n i n g programme
was
underway
and n e a r i n g c o m p l e t i o n .
The L e v e l - A S t u d y c o v e r e d t h e e n t i r e
G r e a t Lakes r e g i o n and encompassed
of
eight
Great
Lakes
portions
water
area
states, a l l of the U.S.
Lawrence
of
t h e l a k e s , and t h e S t .
R i v e r as f a r
as
the
international
boundary.
I t was c o n t e m p l a t e d t h a t
t h e more i n v o l v e d , c o m p l i c a t e d ,
and
immediate p r o b l e m areas w i t h i n t h e
e n t i r e G r e a t L a k e s b a s i n w o u l d be
treated
with
individual
level-B
studies of
t h e Maumee t y p e .
The
most u r g e n t problems
i n t h e Great
Lakes B a s i n w e r e c o n s i d e r e d b y t h e
G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission t o b e
t h e Maumee
River
basin,
which
provided the subject of the f i r s t
level-B study
initiated after
the
t h e G r e a t Lakes
Level-A
Study o f
B a s i n as a w h o l e .

Question 2
The
great
Lakes
Bas i n
Commission f o r m e d a P l a n n i n g Board,
w i t h members f r o m t h e
following
state
and
federal
government
agencies:
t h e I n d i a n a Department o f
N a t u r a l Resources,
the
Michigan
Department o f N a t u r a l Resources, t h e
Ohio
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
t h e U.S.
Department
of
A g r i c u l t u r e , t h e U.S.
Army Corps o f
Environmental
Engineers,
t h e U.S.
Protection
Agency,
the
U.S.
Department o f
the
Interior,
the
G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission, and
the
Maumee
Citizen's
Advisory
Committee (CAC)

I n addition t o the r e l a t i v e l y
highly
s k i l l e d personnel
i n the
s t a t e and f e d e r a l
agencies,
the
Great
Lakes
Basin
Commission's
p l a n n i ng
staff
foresaw
the
possibility of
testing
innovative
planning
processes
in
the
of
t h e Maumee R i v e r
development
Basin plan.
One o f t h e s e p r o c e s s e s
was
the surrogate worth trade-off
method o f h i e r a r c i c a l p l a n n i n g t h a t
was b e i n g d e v e l o p e d a t t h a t t i m e by
Dr. Yacov Haimes o f Case W e s t e r n
Warren
R e s e r v e U n i v e r s i t y and D r .
Or. Haimes was a g r e e a b l e t o
Hall.
the
idea o f
cooperating w i t h the

C o m m i s s i o n ' s p l a n n i n g , and f o r m e d a
r e s e a r c h team t a s k w i t h t h e t i t l e :
A Multiobjective
Analysis
i n the
Maumee R i v e r B a s i n - A Case S t u d y on
Level-B
Planning.
T h i s team was
composed o f ,
i n a d d i t i o n t o Dr.
Ha i mes
as
the
p r i nc i pa 1
invest igator,
three
full-time
research
assistants
and
one
technical secretary.
Also
involved
in
t h i s research p r o j e c t ,
on a
part-time
basis,
were
one
post-doctoral
f e l l o w and f o u r o t h e r
research assistants.
The p u b l i c was i n v o l v e d i n t h e
formulation of project objectives.
I n fact,
the Citizens'
Advisory
Committee was e s t a b l i s h e d i n o r d e r
to
represent
the
public
and
interested citizens'
organizations
i n I n d i a n a , M i c h i g a n , and O h i o .
In
response t o t h e major
p r o b l e m s and
concerns w i t h i n t h e basin, t h e CAC
i d e n t i f i e d e i g h t major goals f o r the
Level-B p l a n .

Question 3
From t h e b e g i n n i n g i t was c l e a r
t h a t l i m i t s would be s e t on t h i s
project
in
terms o f
t h e funds
m i l l i o n dollars)
and
g r a n t e d (1.5
Other
t h e t i m e a v a i l a b l e (3 y e a r s ) .
factors
that
influenced the nature
o f t h e s t u d y were t h e s t r u c t u r e o f
t h e agencies conducting t h e study,
the neutrality of
t h e commission
s t a f f , and t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and
interest of
the several s t a t e s i n
t h e study.
The n a t i o n w i d e c r i t e r i a
for
level-B studies required a review of
s e v e r e p r o b l e m s and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t
of
a
series
of
a 1 t e r na t i ve
solutions.
The
a1 t e r n a t i v e
s o l u t i o n s supported t h r e e d i f f e r e n t
econom i c
goals:
n a t iona 1
development, e n v i r o n m e n t a l
quality,
and a m i x e d a p p r o a c h .
The
national
criteria
for
level-B studies also required that
these
studies
do
not normally
develop
specific
projects
for
construction
but
should
instead
p r e s e n t a program for t h e . b a s i n w i d e
of
p r o b 1 ems.
r e s o 1 u t i on
Consequently,
specific
project

-117-

d e s i g n was
n o t undertaken i n the
Maumee R i v e r B a s i n L e v e l - B S t u d y .
The normal
decision c r i t e r i a for
p r o j e c t d e v e l o p m e n t (such as t h a t i t
presents a favorable benefit/cost
ratio,
that
there
is
no
less
e x p e n s i v e way t o a c h i e v e t h e same
benefit,
t h a t each p a r t o f
the
project
i s incrementally j u s t i f i e d ,
benefit
and t h a t t h e p r o j e c t w i l l
t h e p u b l i c as a w h o l e r a t h e r t h a n
small
segment
of
the
just a
were
not
r ig id 1y
popu 1 a t i on)
emp 1 oyed .

Question 4
Because t h e Maumee R i v e r
Basin
Level-B
S t u d y was c o n s t r a i n e d b y
t i m e and f u n d i n g a s w e l l as b y t h e
u s e o f e x i s t i n g d a t a and c o n c l u s i o n s
o f p a s t and o n g o i n g s t u d i e s , n o t a l l
of
the
Goals
and
Objectives
C i t i zens I
establ ished
by
the
A d v i s o r y Committee c o u l d be m e t b y
t h i s study.
More s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e
l i m i t i n g u s e o f e x i s t i n g d a t a was
imposed
by
t h e Water R e s o u r c e s
C o u n c i l i n t h e i r "New Approaches t o
Level-B
Planning."
This,
together
w i t h a f u n d i n g c u t ( t o 1.5 m i l l i o n
dollars)
and t i m e c u t
(3 y e a r s )
presented problems throughout
the
e n t i r e study period.
Moreover,
the
N a t i o n a l Water Resources C o u n c i l ' s
P r i n c i p l e s and S t a n d a r d s f o r Water
and R e l a t e d Land Resources P l a n n i n g
caused more c o n f u s i o n r a t h e r
than
guidance.
Each agency i n v o l v e d i n
the
study
had
v a r i ous
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and e x p l a n a t i o n s o f
the
Principles
and
Standards.
Because
these
interpretations
expanded
the range of
suggested
a c t i on,
add i t i o n a l
constraints
seemed t o e x i s t i n t h a t t h e members
of
t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission
objected t o consideration o f
the
extreme a l t e r n a t i v e s which
would
p r o d u c e e i t h e r a t o t a l l y economic
a
development-or i e n t e d
plan
or
t o t a l l y environmental
preservation
and improvement p l a n ,
since these
extremes would be u n a c c e p t a b l e t o
c e r t a i n segments o f t h e p u b l i c and
might
be
politically
damaging.
Consequently,
t h e s t a f f and t h e
P l a n n i n g Board w e r e d i r e c t e d
to
e l i m i n a t e t h e more d r a s t i c e x t r e m e s
f i r s t d e s i g n e d and c o n s i d e r
those

closer
t o a midpoint.
The n a t i o n a l
laws i n e f f e c t a t t h i s
time placed
primary water q u a l i t y r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
i n t h e hands o f t h e s t a t e , w i t h t h e
f e d e r a l government h a v i n g r e g u l a t o r y
responsibility.
The s t u d y needed a
systems a p p r o a c h t o w a t e r q u a l i t y
and a w a t e r
quality plan for
the
e n t i r e basin.
The s t a t e s w e r e n o t
equipped t o p r e p a r e such a p l a n .
The f e d e r a l
government
refused t o
considered
undertake i t since they
t h i s t o be a s t a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
and i n t e r p r e t e d f e d e r a l
regulations
t o a l l o w o n l y one a p p r o a c h t o w a t e r
q u a l i t y improvement.
Consequently,
t h e P l a n n i n g Board c o u l d n o t use a
d e s i r a b l e systems a p p r o a c h on
a
q u a n t i t a t i v e b a s i s t h a t m i g h t have
l e d t o an optimum s o l u t i o n t o t h e
water q u a l i t y problems i n t h e b a s i n ,
and
they
i n s t e a d s e l e c t e d as a
in
surrogate the arbitary reduction
silt
as
an
indicator
of
environmental
quality within
the
r i v e r . This i s a r e l a t i v e l y correct
but
limited
representation.
I t
obviously i s not a f u l l treatment of
the environmental
q u a l i t y problem.
Consequently,
the
study
was
inadequate i n t h i s r e s p e c t .

Question 5
No.
I n addition t o discussion
concerning enviromental q u a l i t y , the
efficacy
of
the surrogate worth
t r a d e - o f f (SWT) method was i n i t i a l l y
q u e s t i o n e d because o f
i t s newness
and
un t e s t ed
cond i t i on.
The
consultants
from
Case
Western
Reserve U n i v e r s i t y p r e s e n t e d t h e i r
method t o t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d .
The
P l a n n i n g B o a r d was e n c o u r a g e d
to
support
the
development
of
the
i n f o r m a t i o n needed
by
the
SWT
practioners.
Agreement o v e r methods
to
be u s e d o r d i s p u t e s a r i s i n g
w i t h i n t h e P l a n n i n g Board,
between
t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d and t h e t e c h n i c a l
e x p e r t s and c o n s u l t a n t s , o r b e t w e e n
t h e C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y Committee and
t h e s t u d y c o m m i t t e e were r e s o l v e d b y
a
Steering
Commi t t e e
wh i c h
of
the
represented
supervisors
P l a n n i n g B o a r d members.
The B a s i n
Commissions
had
the
final
responsibility
for
the specific
recommendations e m a n a t i n g from t h e
study

-118-

3. Planning Stage 2
Data
Collection and Processing
Question 6
Level-B s t u d i e s a r e p r e c l u d e d
f r o m c o l l e c t i n g d a t a as a s p e c i f i c
activity.
I n most
cases
where
critical
d a t a a r e a b s e n t , a minimum
data
collection
effort,
within
f u n d i n g and t i m e
limitations,
is
permitted;
however,
most p r e v i o u s
s t u d i e s had s p e n t more t i m e and
money o n d a t a c o l l e c t i o n t h a n on
p r o b l e m r e s o l u t i o n , and t h e L e v e l - B
S t u d y was d e s i g n e d t o c o u n t e r a c t
this situation.

OBERS
The s t u d y
used
the
Series-E
projections of
national
d e m o g r a p h i c and economic
growth.
OBERS i s an acronym d e r i v e d from t h e
two f e d e r a l
agencies
involved i n
their
preparation:
t h e Bureau o f
Economic A n a l y s i s (U.S.
Department
of
Commerce)
and
t h e Economic
Research S e r v i c e
(U.S.
Department
of
Agriculture).
These two f e d e r a l
agencies a r e t h e p r i n c i p a l
sources
of
the
long-range
projects of
p o p u l a t i o n and demand f o r
resources
used b y t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .
I n the mathematical a n a l y s i s
used
i n t h e Maurnee R i v e r
Basin
Study,
t h e base year d a t a c o n s i s t e d
o f d a t a f r o m 1974 and 1975, and t h e
1990 d a t a p r o j e c t i o n came f r o m O B E R S
Series-E
projections.
The p h y s i c a l
include
d a t a used i n t h e s t u d y
i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e d r a i n a g e area,
l a n d u s e and
land a v a i l a b i l i t y o f
t h e b a s i n f o r a g r i c u l t u r e and o t h e r
l a n d a c t i v i t i e s , and h y d r o l o g i c and
the
pollution
e f f l u e n t data for
e x i s t i n g treatment
f a c i l i t i e s plus
their
capacities
and
location.
Various
a g e n c i e s were t h e s o u r c e o f
estimated
data,
such
as
the
efectiveness
of
recreational
d e v e l o p m e n t and f l o o d i n g p r e v e n t i o n .
The Corps o f
Engineers
had
r e c e n t l y completed a basinwide s t u d y
o f h y d r o l o g i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e
b a s i n and t h e i r i m p a c t s upon f l o o d
no
control.
Consequent 1 y ,
additional hydrologic investigations
were c o n d u c t e d .

SOC

supp 1 i ed
pol i t i c a
basin.

a1 and economic d a t a were

b y t h e s t a t e and o t h e r
subdivisions w i t h i n the

Quest on 7
I n g e n e r a l , on,ly e x i s t i n g d a t a
were used.
However,
new a n a l y s e s
and d i s p l a y s o f e x i s t i n g d a t a were
developed.
A r t i f i c i a l generation o f
h y d r o l o g i c d a t a had been d e v e l o p e d
b y t h e Corps o f E n g i n e e r s and t h i s
i n f o r m a t i o n was a v a i l a b l e
t o the
Some
measurements
were
study .
continued d u r i n g the planning stage,
such as w a t e r q u a l i t y measurements,
b u t t h e s e had
relatively
minor
e f f e c t s on p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g .

Question 8a
No

Question 86
Yes.
In particular,
the land
resources
management
cost
optimization
model,
which
was
composed o f
an a g r i c u l t u r a l
land
a
management
p r a c t i c e s submodel,
r e c r e a t i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t submodel, a
w i l d l i f e p r e s e r v a t i o n submodel,
and
a
f l o o d p l a i n a c q u i s i t i o n submodel,
was r e s t r i c t e d t o b e i n g a l i n e a r
model
because o f
the
incomplete
i n f o r m a t i o n o r data on these r e l a t e d
subjects.
I t was a p p a r e n t
t h a t a water
q u a l i t y p l a n n i n g model s h o u l d be
developed, t a k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n
c o n t r ib u t ions
from
point
and
non-point sources j o i n t l y .
In this
phase
of
the
research,
four
cons i s t u e n t s
were
pol 1utant
considered
for
intensive study.
T.hese were s e d i m e n t , phosphorus f r o m
point
sources,
phosphorus
from
distributed
sources,
and
the
b i o 1 og i ca 1 oxygen demand (BOD) 1 oad
f r o m m u n i c i p a l and i n d u s t r i a l w a s t e
discharges.
However, t h i s i s n o t t o i m p l y
t h a t o t h e r p o l l u t i n g substances a r e
not important.
The l a c k o f d a t a and
a
lack
of
knowledge
of
the
r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e amount o f

-119-

d i s c h a r g e o f t h e s e c o n s t i t u e n t s and
t h e r e s u l t i n g l e v e l o f water q u a l i t y
p r e v e n t e d u s f r o m i n c l u d i n g them
in
the analysis.

Question 9
No.

Question 10
No.

Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation and Screening of Project
Alternatives
4.

Question 1 7
The r e s o u r c e s o f t i m e f u n d s and
personnel
used i n
the
planning
process
have
been d i s c u s s e d
in
P l a n n i n g Stage
1.
An a d d i t i o n a l
$100,000 was g r a n t e d by t h e N a t i o n a l
S c i e n c e F o u n d a t i o n and t h e O f f i c e o f
Water
Research and T e c h n o l o g y
to
support the
CWRU
multiobjective
analysis
r e s e a r c h a c t i v i t y used f o r
the
study.
Various
computing
f a c i l i t i e s were e x t e n s i v e l y u s e d t o
g e n e r a t e and c o n f i r m t h e d a t a needed
and
to
analyze
the
objective
trade-offs
finally
recommended by
t h e CWRU r e s e a r c h team.
A UNIVAC
1108
computer was used f o r
the
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e a n a l y s i s .

Question 12
Institutional
support
was
provided
by
the
U.S.
Water
Resources C o u n c i l w i t h r e s p e c t t o
funding o f
the project
by
the
federal
government.
The C o u n c i l
a l s o o b t a i n e d responses f r o m t h e
f e d e r a l agency and a t t e m p t e d w i t h o u t
success t o r e s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m o f
t h e lukewarm c o o p e r a t i o n o f t h e U . S .
EPA.
The
Great
Lakes
Bas i n
Commission
provided
substantial
a d d i t i o n a l support t o the study by
providing
specialized
h e l p when
needed and
supplying
additional
manpower
for
public
relations
interaction
with
the
Citizens'
Advisory
Committee.
The
states,
furnished
particularly
Oh i 0 ,
top-level
s u p p o r t where needed and

also provided
input
from
their
regular
planning
agencies.
A l l
needed p a s t r e c o r d s o f
the states
were
made
available.
Loca 1
political
entities
provided
cooperative support
i n furnishi,ng
meeting f a c i l i t i e s , p u b l i c notices,
support
and
other
genera 1
activities.
The c o o p e r a t i o n
was
g e n e r a l l y adequate.
However, more
t i m e l y i n p u t w o u l d have been h e l p f u l
from
the
federal
agenc i es ,
particularly
those
dealing with
environmental q u a l i t y .
The s t u d y c o n d u c t e d b y t h e CWRU
team was m o n i t o r e d by a c a r e f u l l y
Comm i t t e e
selected
Adv i s o r y
c o n s i s t i n g o f one member from e a c h
of
t h e f o l l o w i n g agencies:
(i) the
G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission
(ii)
Department o f A g r i c u l t u r e ,
t h e U.S.
Economic R e s e a r c h S e r v i c e ( i i i ) t h e
U.S.
Geological
Survey,
Water
Resources D i v i s i o n ,
and
(iv)
the
U.S.
Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l .
In
addition, the Principal Investigator
attended meetings o f
the Advisory
Committee, as d i d p r o j e c t o f f i c e r s
f rom
the
National
Sc i ence
F o u n d a t ion--Res.earch
Appl i e d
to
N a t i o n a l Needs Program, and t h e U . S .
Department o f
the Interior--Office
o f Water R e s e a r c h and T e c h n o l o g y .

Question 73
C i t i z e n i n v o l v e m e n t p l a y e d an
important r o l e i n goal s e t t i n g , t h e
definition of
alternatives,
the
d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f p r i o r i t i e s , and t h e
formulation o f the f i n a l plans.
One
mechanism f o r
public participation
was t h e C i t i z e n ' s A d v i s o r y Committee
(CAC), a n o n g o v e r n m e n t a l
group o f
thirty
p r i v a t e c i t i z e n s from the
t h r e e s t a t e s who w o r k e d c l o s e l y w i t h
t h e government
planners i n guiding
p l a n development.
The p r e l i m i n a r y
a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s developed i n
t h e f i r s t phase o f
t h e s t u d y were
reviewed
and
refined
through a
s e r i e s o f p u b l i c workshops h e l d
in
cities
across
the basin during
1974.
Following
October
participation
in this
r e v i e w and
f u r t h e r r e f i n e m e n t and agreement b y
members, t h e C A C p u b l i s h e d i t s G o a l s
R e p o r t (March, 1975)

-120-

A
series
of
open
and
i n f o r m a t i o n p u b l i c f o r u m s was h e l d
1976.
i n eight c i t i e s
i n January,
The p u r p o s e o f t h e s e f o r u m s was t o
r e v i e w t h e Economic Development and
Environmental
Quality Alternative
Plans
as
starting
points
for
d i s c u s s i o n o f what c i t i z e n s w o u l d
l i k e t o see
incorporated
i n the
A t the time o f the
Final Plan.
forums,
w r i t t e n comments o n
the
alternative
plans
were
a1 so
solicited,
and a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was
m a i l e d t o e v e r y o n e on t h e Maumee
Study m a i l i n g l i s t .
The p u r p o s e o f
t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was
to quantify
p u b l i c c h o i c e s and c o n c e r n s i n a way
that
would
assist
the planning
process.
The
questionnaire,
the
of
small
work-group
summar i es
d i s c u s s i o n s t h a t took
place during
t h e forums,
and t h e r e v i e w s and
p r e f e r e n c e s s t a t e d b y t h e C A C were
a l l used i n d e f i n i n g t h e F i n a l
Plan
and i n a s s i g n i n g r e l a t i v e p u b l i c
priorities
t o proposed programs.
The F i n a l P l a n t h u s r e f l e c t s p u b l i c
preferences
for
implementing
programs and a d d r e s s i n g
t h e water
and r e l a t e d l a n d - r e s o u r c e
needs o f
t h e Maumee B a s i n .

Question 74
The Maumee C i t i z e n ' s A d v i s o r y
Committee p r o v i d e d t h e g o a l s and
objectives
used i n f o r m u l a t i n g t h e
alternative
plans
and
the
recommended c o u r s e o f a c t i o n .
The
d e t a i l e d development
of
the goals
f o c u s e d on t h e f o l l o w i n g a r e a s o f
concern:
l a n d use and management,
e r o s i o n and s e d i m e n t a t i o n c o n t r o l ,
w a t e r q u a l i t y management,
f i s h and
wildlife
management,
outdoor
r e c r e a t i o n d e v e l o p m e n t , d r a i n a g e and
f l o o d damage r e d u c t i o n , w a t e r s u p p l y
development,
management o f
Maumee
Bay,
and
l e g a l , i n s t i t u t i o n a l , and
l e g i s l a t i v e issues.
Throughout
the
Study,
the
a l t e r n a t i v e measures were r e f i n e d
the
and and r e e v a l u a t e d i n l i g h t o f
g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s e s t a b l i s h e d by
the Citizen's
Advisory
Committee.
Over 560 m a j o r a l t e r n a t i v e measures
t o s o l v e v a r i o u s resource problems

were i d e n t i f i e d d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f
the
Study.
The
met hod
of
and
ana 1 y s i s
of
d e v e Iopment
alternative
plans
and
of
the
Recommended
Level-B
Plan
were
o r i e n t e d t o w a r d t h e P r i n c i p l e s and
S t a n d a r d s f o r Water and R e l a t e d Land
P1 a n n i ng.
(Federal
Resources
2 3 , 1973).
R e g i s t e r , Sept.
Programs were d e v e l o p e d f o r t h e
of
1 and
resources
c a t e g o r i es
management,
eros ion
and
sed irnentat i o n ,
water
qual i t y ,
w i l d l i f e , f i s h e r y resources, outdoor
recreation,
f l o o d i n g , water supply,
and Maumee Bay.
C o n s i d e r a t i o n was
to
structural
and
g i ven
nonstructural
solutions
regardless
o f whether t h e s o l u t i o n s w o u l d b e
undertaken by t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r o r
b y any o f s e v e r a l u n i t s and l e v e l s
o f government.

All
practicable
management
measures,
both
structural
and
nonstructural,
were s c r e e n e d
for
effectiveness,
acceptability,
and
technical
f e a s i b i l i t y f o r meeting
p r o b l e m s , n e e d s , and o p p o r t u n i t i e s .
P r eserva t i on,
c o n s e r v a t i on,
and
d e v e l o p m e n t o f w a t e r and r e l a t e d
land resources w e r e ' a l l
considered.
potentia 1
a1 t e r n a t i v e
Var i ous
components
were
not
considered
f u r t h e r because o f
lack of
public
interest,
1 ack
of
econom i c
j u s t i f i c a t i o n , o r due t o t e c h n i c a l
considerations.
I n b r i e f , more t h a n
560 a l t e r n a t i v e s were s u g g e s t e d b y
the Citizens'
Advisory
Committee,
t h e P l a n n i n g Committee,
and
the
G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission.
The
Planning Board, i n general,
decided
upon
the
alternatives
to
be
investigated i n detail.

Question 75:
The h i e r a r c h i e s and t h e v a r i o u s
levels of
responsibility for
the
decision-making
process
were
5
in
d i s c u s s e d under
Question
Planning Stage 1.
The P l a n n i n g Board was composed
of
planners
who
had
utilized
traditional
methods
i n developing
plans f o r water
r e s o u r c e s programs
and
projects.
They
were,
in

-121-

general,
not familiar w i t h
the
surrogate worth trade-off
(SWT)
method o r w i t h
the hierarchical
t e c h n i q u e s u t i l i z e d i n t h i s method.
They q u e s t i o n e d
the efficacy of
developing a p l a n u t i l i z i n g these
methods w h i c h r e l i e d
upon
the
P a r e t o optimum o f
the i n d i v i d u a l
planner.
They w e r e accustomed t o
g i v i n g a s i n g l e answer, i n g e n e r a l ,
rather
than a
range o f
Pareto
optimal
solutions.
Consequently,
the consul t a n t s
from
CWRU
had
i n i t i a l l y considerable d i f f i c u l t y
i n s e c u r i n g f r o m i n d i v i d u a l members
of
the
Planning
Board
their
objectives
and a n a r t i c u l a t i o n o f
their subjective trade-offs.
Many
times
a
p e r s o n was u n a b l e t o
a
describe
why
he
preferred
s p e c i f i c s o l u t i o n and what
he was
w i l l i n g t o g i v e up t o achieve i t .
Nevertheless,
through
iterative
efforts, the objective trade-offs
were g e n e r a t e d v i a t h e SWT method,
with
v a r i ous
levels
of
decision-makers c o n t r i b u t i n g t o the
surrogate
worth
trade-off
functions.
The
trade-offs
were
obtained
through
an
imp1 i c i t
process
that
was
explicitly
e x p r e s s e d b y t h e SWT method.
A procedure
for
obtaining
trade-offs
can b e f o u n d i n Haimes
and H a l l ( 1 9 7 4 ) , Haimes (198O), and
Chankong and Haimes (1982)

Question 16
Basically,
t h e same s e t o f
constraints described i n Question 4
extended
its
effect
to
this
planning stage.
Moreover,
because
of
t h e complex, i n t e r s t a t e n a t u r e
o f t h i s Level-B
planning e f f o r t ,
the
bas i n
was decomposed
into
p l a n n i n g subareas
consisting
of
groups o f c o u n t i e s .
These p l a n n i n g
subarea b o u n d a r i e s , a l t h o u g h u s e f u l
for
efficient
econom i c
and
demographic d a t a c o l l e c t i o n , o f t e n
did
not
coincide
with
the
hydrologic boundaries. Therefore,
some recommendations s e t f o r t h by
t h e Level-B
P l a n w o u l d have t o be
s l i g h l y m o d i f i e d b e f o r e they
could
be i n t e g r a t e d i n t o o t h e r p l a n n i n g
and r e s o u r c e agency e f f o r t s .
For
example, o n l y t h o s e p o r t i o n s o f t h e

Plan i n the hydrologic basin could

b e a d o p t e d as p a r t o f
the Great
Lakes B a s i n P l a n .
O c c a s i o n a l gaps
i n the data
base f o r
t h e Level-B
S t u d y may
present
another
methodological
c o n s t r a i n t on implementation.
The
study methodology focused d i r e c t l y
on t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g d a t a
s o u r c e s and n o t on t h e c o l l e c t i o n
of
new and o r i g i n a l
data.
This
factor, along w i t h the f a c t
that
t h i s study
i s the f i r s t
i n the
basin t h a t takes a m u l t i o b j e c t i v e
approach
t o p l a n n i n g and a t t e m p t s
of
t o present a uniform level
detail
for
each p l a n n i n g e l e m e n t ,
p r o v i d e s t h e reason f o r
occasional
d a t a gaps.
These gaps may a c t a s a
constraint
on t h e
l o c a l , county,
or
s t a t e o f f i c i a l who
regional,
seeks t o implement a L e v e l - B
Plan
recommended f o r
a s p e c i f i c area.
However, i t must b e r e c o g n i z e d t h a t
where d a t a gaps and needs
for
additional
s t u d i es
have
been
i d e n t i f i e d , s p e c i f i c recommendaions
t h e r e o n a r e embodied i n t h e L e v e l - B
Plan.
One
maj o r
1egis 1a t i v e
i n f l u e n c e on t h e development o f t h e
water
q u a l i t y p o r t i o n o f the Study
i s t h e F e d e r a l Water
Pollution
Control
A c t Amendments o f
1972
(P.L.
92-500).
This federal
act
s e t s u p t h e framework
f o r water
quality
planning
thoughout
the
nation.
The s t r u c t u r e o f
t h e Study
o r g a n i z a t i o n was one o f
t h e most
difficult
factors,
and i t p o s e d a
natural c o n s t r a i n t t h a t every study
member f a c e s c o n s t a n t l y .
I t would
be
usefu1
to
d e s c r i be
the
s t r u c t u r a l anatomy h e r e t o r e a l i z e
t h e Study s i t u a t i o n .
The
Maumee
R iv e r
Bas i n
P l a n n i n g Board c o n s i s t e d o f
one
member f r o m each o f t h e f o l l o w i n g
agencies:
The G r e a t Lakes B a s i n
Commission
( w h i c h a l s o s e r v e d as
the
U.S.
Study
Manager) ;
Environmental
P r o t e c t i o n Agency;
The
U.S.
Department
of
Agr i c u l t u r e ,
Soi 1
Conservation
Service;
t h e U.S.
Army Corps o f

-122-

Engineers:
t h e U.S.
Department o f
the
Interior,
Bureau o f
Outdoor
Recreation;
t h e Ohio E n v i r o n m e n t a l
Protection
Agency;
the
Indiana
D e p a r t m e n t o f N a t u r a l R e s o u r c e s ; and
t h e M i c h i g a n Department o f
Natural
A
S t e e r i n g Committee,
Resources.
made
UP
of
higher-level
representatives
from
the
above
a g e n c i e s , was c h a r g e d w i t h r e s o l v i n g
possible
conflicts
among
the
a g e n c i e s a t P l a n n i n g B o a r d l e v e l and
providing
guidelines
for
policy
issues.

The i n t e r a g e n c y
s e t t i n g added
t o t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e s t u d y team
where t h e a g e n c i e s '
manpower and
o t h e r r e s o u r c e s were made a v a i l a b l e
to
the
study.
However,
th i s
structure
had
rigidities
and
o b s t a c l e s , s u c h as t h e i n a b i l i t y o f
several
P l a n n i n g B o a r d members t o
exercise t h e i r
own
professional
judgements
because t h e y were under
their
specific
i n s t r u c t i o n s from
supervisors
or
were
bound
by
l o n g s t a n d i n g agency p o l i c i e s .

Question 77

The f o l l o w i n g m o d e l s w e r e used:

MORE
mode 1
(Mu 1 t i p 1 e
1) t h e
O b j e c t i v e Resources E v a l u a t i o n )

An a n a l y t i c a l
linear
programming
model
for
agricultural
analysis
d e v e l o p e d b y t h e Economic Research
Service,
U.S.
Department
of
A g r i c u l t u r a l , f o r g e n e r a l usage.

2)

An
analytical
linear/nonlinear
programming
method
for multiobject ive
o p t i m i z a t io n
a n a l ys i s
developed
b y Yacov Y . Haimes and
Hall.
Warren A .

t h e SWT m e t h o d
Trade-off)

(Surrogate

Worth

3) h y d r o l o g i c a l f l o o d - p l a n models

A s i m u l a t i o n model f o r
hydrological
Army
a n a l y s i s developed by the U.S.
Corps
of
Engineers f o r
general
usage.

4) t h e Maumee Bay S t u d y Model

A s i m u l a t i o n model f o r t h e s t u d y o f
t h e Maumee Bay p r o b l e m s d e v e l o p e d b y
t h e G r e a t Lakes E n v i r o n m e n t a l Ressearch Laboratory--National
Oceanic
and
Atmospheric
Administration
(Dr. A r t h u s Pinsak)
(G LE R L -NO AA)
for this project

5) t h e g e n e r a l i z e d r e d u c e d

An e f f e c t i v e n o n l i n e a r o p t i m i z a t i o n
package--the
generalized
reduced
g r a d i e n t (GRG) method was e x t e n s i v l y
used i n
c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e SWT
method f o r
the
generation
of
Pareto-optimal
s o l u t i o n s and t h e i r
associated trade-offs.

mode 1

gradient

-123-

The MORE
(multiple-objective
resource
evaluation)
model ,
d e v e l o p e d b y t h e Economic R e s e a r c h
U.S.
Department
of
S e r v i ce,
was used e x t e n s i v e l y
Agriculture,
for modeling t h e d i s t r i b u t e d source
pollution control,
and i t s o u t p u t s
were
used
to
determine
model
coefficients.
The MORE model was
m o d i f i e d and e x t e n d e d t o
include
mu1 t i p o l l u t a n t
(sed i ment
and
in
our
case)
system
phosphorus
o b j e c t i v e s as w e l l as o t h e r
related
b u t noncommensurable o b j e c t i v e s such
as r e c r e a t i o n and t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n
of w i l d l i f e habitats.

Question 1%
The Maumee Bay s i m u l a t i o n model
was
constantly
updated.
The
f l o o d p l a i n s i m u l a t i o n model was i n a
reasonably mature s t a t e , r e q u i r i n g
AI 1
the
little
modification.
ana 1 y t i ca 1 mode 1 s
(MORE, SWT, GRG)
were w e l l
tested,
calibrated,
and
verified for
d a t a c o n s i s t e n c y and
o p t i m a l i t y of r e s u l t s .

Question 19
Most o f
the f i n a l
p l a n was
b a s i c a l l y developed by t h e t e c h n i c a l
experts working w i t h i n the
limits
s e t by t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s o f t h e
G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission,
and
they u t i l i z e d t o a great e x t e n t the
p r e f e r e n c e s and o b j e c t i v e s o f
the
Citizens
Advisory
Committee w i t h
respect t o the type o f p r o j e c t s
needed i n s p e c i f i c a r e a s w i t h i n t h e
basin.
However, t h e GLBC d i d change
some p o r t i o n s o f t h e p l a n d e v e l o p e d
by
the techpica1
experts before
g i v i n g t h e i r approval.

Question 20
The Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y
was a p l a n n i n g e f f o r t t h a t was t r u l y
interdisciplinary;
however ,
an
optimum m i x o f t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t s was
n o t always a v a i l a b l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y
i n the environmental q u a l i t y f i e l d .

The S t u d y p o i n t e d o u t
the
i rnpor t a n c e
of
some
of
the
prerequisites for
t h e success o f
any
interdisciplinary
s t u d y , such
as d e v e l o p i n g m u t u a l
t r u s t among
t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s and h e l p i n g e a c h
participant to realize that within
his
own
discipline
he
can
contribute
t o the overall
study
effort.
Additional
known
c o n d i t i o n s f o r p r o j e c t success t h a t
were i m p o r t a n t i n c l u d e d t h e m u t u a l
development
of
cooperative s p i r i t
among p a r t i c i p a n t s ,
so
that
the
n a t u r a l b i a s among t h e d i s c i p l i n e s
c o u l d b e overcome and p a r t i c i p a n t s
c o u l d come t o t o l e r a t e o p p o s i n g
approaches,
and
p o i n t s of view,
beliefs.
The t i m e needed f o r t h e s e
c o n d i t i o n s t o d e v e l o p and m a t u r e
and t h e f a c t
t h a t almost every
p a r t i c i p a n t j o i n e d t h e team w i t h
h i s own p r e c o n c e i v e d n o t i o n o f w h a t
constitutes
a
level-B
planning
s t u d y may e x p l a i n t h e t i m e s p e n t
during
the
f ir s t
phases
in
p h i l o s o p h i c a l and sometimes t r i v i a l
d i s c u s s i ons
I t
i s here t h a t
well-developed
and
acceptable
guidelines
for
regional
or
r i v e r - b a s i n p l a n n i n g w o u l d have t h e
most impact on s t r e a m l i n i n g t h e s e
costly,
time-consuming
debates.
Such g u i d e l i , n e s c o u l d i n t h e f u t u r e
p r o v i d e a general
framework
and
p l a t f o r m f o r an a c c e p t a b l e s t a r t i n g
p o i n t i n t h e p l a n n i n g process.

5.
Planning Stage 4:
Development of Final
Project Specifications
Question 2 1
G e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , l i n e a r and
non1 i near
programmi ng
techniques
were
used
to
deal
with
the
analytical
m o d e l s and s i m u l a t i o n
techniques
were
used
in
the
s i m u l a t i o n m o d e l s (see Q u e s t i o n 1 7 ) .
The m o s t t h e o r e t i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d
(though
quite
straighforward)
methodology used
i n analyzing the
Maumee R i v e r B a s i n m u l t i o b j e c t i v e
problem
was
the surrogate worth
t r a d e - o f f (SWT) method.

-124-

The b a s i n ' s p l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s
were
mathematically
formulated
w i t h i n the optimization
framework.
The submodels f o r
l a n d management
and w a t e r q u a l i t y
r e p r e s e n t i n g one
or
more o f
t h e o b j e c t i v e s were
d e v e l o p e d and w e r e t h e n i n t e g r a t e d
t o form the o v e r a l l m u l t i o b j e c t i v e
p l a n n i n g model.
Most
of
these
integrated
into
the
mode 1 s
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
o p t i m i z a t i on
f r a m e w o r k w e r e d e v e l o p e d a t CWRU
during the research period.
The
surrogate worth trade-off
methods
and i t s e x t e n s i o n s a r e d i s c u s s e d
in
d e t a i l i n t h e f o l l o w i n g a r t i c l e s and
books :
Y.Y.
Haimes and W . A .
Hall,
"Mu1 t i - o b j e c t i v e s i n Water R e s o u r c e s
Systems
Analysis:
The S u r r o g a t e
Worth
Trade-off
Method,"
Water
Resources Research,
Vol.
10,
No.
4, Aug.
1974

Y.Y.
Haimes, W . A .
Hall,
and
Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
F r eedman ,
H .T.
Optimization
in
Water
Resources
The
Surrogate
Worth
Sys tems :
Trade-off
Method,
E 1 sev i e r ,
Amsterdam, 1975.
Y.Y.
Haimes,
Hierarchical
A n a l y s e s o f Water R e s o u r c e s Systems:
Modeling
and
Optimization
of
Large-scale
Systems,
McGraw-Hill ,
New Y o r k , 1977.
Y.Y.
Haimes,
"The
Surrogate
W o r t h T r a d e - o f f (SWT) Method and I t s
Extensions,"
in Multiple Criteria
Decision
Making:
Theory
and
G.
F a n d e l and T .
Applications,
Gal, E d i t o r s ,
Springer-Verlag,
New
York, 1980, pp.
85-108

V.
Chankong and Y . Y .
Haimes,
Mu1 i o b j e c t i v e
Decision
Making:
Theory
and
and
Methodology,
Elsevier-North
Holland,
New Y o r k ,
1983 ( i n p r e s s )
Hierarchical-multiobjective
modeling i s a n a t u r a l approach t h a t
i s r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e l a r g e s c a l e and
s u c h systems as t h e
complexity of
Maumee R i v e r B a s i n .
T h i s approach
is
essential
for
handling the
planning
of
large-scale
water

r e s o u r c e s and e n v i r o n m e n t a l s y s t e m s ,
because i t t a k e s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n
t h e m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e s and g o a l s o f
t h e system as w e l l as most o f
the
system's i n t e r a c t i o n s .
Hierarchical
m u l t i o b j e c t i v e analyses p r o v i d e a
potent
approach
for
a n a l y z i ng
l a r g e - s c a l e systems i n t h e c o n t e x t
o f t h e decision-making process.

A
discussion
optimal i t y
can
be
Q u e s t i o n 26.

of
found

mode 1
under

The CWRU r e s e a r c h team w o u l d

recommend
the
use
of
t h e SWT
approach
in
any
similar
study
because o f
the following
special
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e method:

1.
The SWT method p r o p e r l y
leaves t o s p e c i a l i z e d a n a l y s i s
the
quantitative-predictive (scientific)
a s p e c t s o f an e v a l u a t i o n b u t c l e a r l y
g i v e s t h e decision-maker t h e r i g h t
and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o e v a l u a t e t h e
merits
of
improving
any
one
objective a t
t h e expense o f
any
other,
given
the
associated
q u a n t i t a t i v e l e v e l s o f achievement
of a l l o b j e c t i v e s .
2.
U s i n g t h e SWT method,
the
decision-maker
interacts w i t h the
systems a n a l y s t and t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l
model a t a g e n e r a l and v e r y m o d e r a t e
level.
The
decision-maker's
preferences
for
a
noninferior
s o l u t i o n a r e c o n s t r u c t e d through the
trade-off functions i n the objective
f u n c t i o n space,
which
is familiar
to
most
and
mean i n g f u 1
decision-makers.
Only then a r e they
t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e d e c i s i o n space.

3. Since the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of
optimal preferences which lead t o a
s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f t h e best-compromise
solution
(also c a l l e d the preferred
is
direct
with
the
solution)
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r , t h e SWT method i s
v e r y w e l l s u i t e d t o t h e a n a l y s i s and
of
mu1 t i o b j e c t i ve
o p t i m iz a t ion
mu1 t i p l e
functions
hav i ng
decision-makers.
4.The SWT method p r o v i d e s f o r a
quantitative
ana 1 y s i s
of
o b j ec t i ve
noncommensurable

-125-

5.
When
the
number
of
objective
functions
i s three or
more, t h i s method has an a p p r e c i a b l e
computational advantage over o t h e r
e x i s t i n g methods
(Cohon and H a r k s
1975 1 *
Question 22
Where s u f f i c i e n t
data
were
avai lable,
m o n e t a r y b e n e f i t s and
c o s t s were computed.
The c o s t e d
elements o f the p l a n s
include both
facilities
and
programs
of
a
governmental
or
group type,
and
t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l programs t h a t a r e
normally f u l l y or p a r t i a l l y financed
from p u b l i c f u n d s .
Capital costs
were
calculated
for
both
installation
and
t e c h n i ca 1
assistance
expenses,
and
they
i n c l u d e l a b o r , m a t e r i a l s , equipment,
rights-of-way,
water
rights,
engineering,
and
administration.
Other
capital
cost
categories
include a g r i c u l t u r a l erosion-control
implementation,
technical
studies,
and a c q u i s i t i o n and d e v e l o p m e n t o f
recreation sites.
The
capital
projects
were
c o n v e r t e d t o annual
costs using a
50-year
l i f e a t the then-current
federal
discount rate o f
6 318
percent.
Exceptions
t o t h i s were
waste-water
and
muni c i pa 1
storm-water
treatment
facilities,
w h i c h w e r e c o s t e d f o r a 20-year
1 ife.
Operations,
maintenance,
and
replacement
(OMSR)
costs r e f e r t o
t h e annual
c o s t f o r upkeep
and
management
of
in-place
capital
i tems.
Annual
costs
are also
calculated
for
projects
not
requiring
a
first-time
capital
expense.
They
include
average
annual
costs,
such as t h o s e f o r
administration of
land resources,
and t a x l o s s r e s u l t i n g f r o m o u t d o o r
r e c r e a t i o n development.
These c o s t s
have
been
averaged
for
the
fifteen-year period.
For example,
the
operation,
maintenance,
and
replacement c o s t s i n the p l a n a r e
t h e average monetary o u t l a y s d u r i n g
t h e f i f t e e n years r a t h e r than f o r
t h e development i n p l a c e i n t h e year

1990.

Benefits of
the
alternative
p l a n s were d e v e l o p e d i n a c c o r d a n c e
with
Principles
and
S t anda r d s
guidelines.
Where s u f f i c i e n t d a t a
were a v a i l a b l e , t h e s e b e n e f i t s were
quantified.
This
i n c l u d e d such
i t e m s as d o l l a r s o f a n n u a l
flood
damages p r e v e n t e d ;
dollar value o f
t h e h u n t i n g , f i s h i n g and r e c r e a t i o n
days
p r o v i d e d by t h e p l a n ;
and
increased
income
accruing
to
residents of
t h e b a s i n as a r e s u l t
at
the
of
i n c r e a s e d employment
construction projects
suggested by
the plan.

Question 23
An i m p a c t a n a l y s i s ,
c a l l e d an
environmental
i m p a c t a n a l y s i s , was
made i n a p r e l i m i n a r y o r g e n e r a l i z e d
fashion.
No r i s k
analysis
was
undertaken,
except t h a t which might
be
assumed
for
flood
control
projects
where
protection
from
flooding for
different
frequencies
was
indicated.
Risk a n a l y s i s might
have b e e n d e s i r a b l e f o r
a greater
p o r t i o n o f t h e measures p r o p o s e d i n
t h e p l a n had a d e q u a t e
information
been a v a i l a b l e upon w h i c h t o b a s e
such an a n a l y s i s .
An e n v i r o n m e n t a l
i m p a c t s t a t e m e n t was
r e q u i r e d by
f e d e r a l law and p r o v i d e d a b a s i s f o r
judgment o f
the efficacy of
the
s e v e r a l elements o f t h e p l a n .

Question 2 4
The P l a n n i n g Board members w e r e
the
principal
decision-makers
involved
in
the
selection
of
preferred plans.
They u t i l i z e d a l l
information
available
to
them,
CWRU
including
input
from
the
r e s e a r c h team c o n c e r n i n g t h e P a r e t o
optimum
of
the
multiobjective
optimization
problem
and
the
Citizens'
A d v i s o r y Committee w i t h
r e s p e c t t o t h e i r recommendations and
of
the
the ultimate
selection
National
Economic Development (NED)
Qua 1 i t y
(EQ)
and
Env i ronrnenta 1
portions of
the plan.
The G r e a t
Lakes B a s i n Commission e n t e r e d i n t o
the selection of
elements o f
the
f i n a l p l a n by s e l e c t i n g t h e p o r t i o n s
of
t h e N E D and EQ e l e m e n t s t o b e
incorporated
in
the
final
recommended.plan.

-126-

In
the
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
optimization
scheme
(the
SWT
method), , t h e t r a d e - o f f v a l u e between
functions,
t h e it a n d j t h o b j e c t i v e
xij, p r o v i d e d a
b r o a d base
of
i n f o r m a t i o n , a l l o f w h i c h was needed
i n t h e p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g
I t has been shown t h a t
process.

= - -

'ij

afi
af

These t r a d e - o f f
values
were
generated simultaneously w i t h the
is
Pareto-optimum
solutions.
I t
q u i t e important t o note t h a t
the
and
the
trade-off
v a 1 ues
corresponding
Pareto-optimum
s o l u t i o n s can be r e a d i l y u t i l i z e d i n
the
decision-making
p r o c e s s even
without generating the
surrogate
w o r t h f u n c t i o n s t h a t t h e SWT method
calls for.
I n o t h e r words,
while
t h e SWT method i n i t s e l f i s composed
o f s e v e r a l c o n s e c u t i v e phases, i t i s
n o t m a n d a t o r y t o a c t i v a t e a l l phases
t o u s e t h e method.
This f a c t i s of
paramount
importance f o r
analysts
and u s e r s who m i g h t n o t n e c e s a r i l y
a p p r e c i a t e t h e way
t h e SWT method
calls
for
interaction
between
a n a l y s t s and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s , a n d / o r
the
generation of
the surrogate
worth functions.

A l l s t u d e n t s o f economics
(and
most,
i f n o t a l l water resources
planners belong i n t h i s category)
are
familiar
w i t h and u s e t h e
c o n c e p t o f m a r g i n a l b e n e f i t and c o s t
i n their
analysis.
The t r a d e - o f f
values
essentially
represent the
marginal
v a l u e concept w i t h
the
exception t h a t t h e numerator might
n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be g i v e n i n monetary
units.
I n o t h e r words,
while
the
"classical"
marginal
b e n e f i t might
be g i v e n i n t e r m s o f d o l l a r s p e r t o n
of
sediment,
the trade-off
value
m i g h t be g i v e n i n terms o f
bushels
of c r o p per t o n o f sediment.
The e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e Maumee
R i v e r B a s i n P l a n n i n g B o a r d shows
t h a t w h i l e the generation o f the
t r a d e - o f f v a l u e s i n terms o f u n i t s
o f the ithobjective per u n i t s of the
jth o b j e c t i v e
is
possible
and
a n a l y t i c a l l y elegant,
these values
are not useful
t o the
planners

u n l e s s t h e y a r e g i v e n i n terms o f
d o l l a r s per u n i t o f t h e j t h o b j e c t i v e .
T h a t i s t o s a y , i n a p p l y i n g t h e SWT
method, i t i s p r e f e r a b l e t o h a v e t h e
primary objective
f u n c t i o n be t h e
c o s t (or b e n e f i t ) f u n c t i o n , g i v e n i n
monetary u n i t s , w h i l e a l l
other
objectives
in
the -constraint
f o r m u l a t i o n a r e i n t h e i r own u n i t s .
Two o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e
i n order a t
t h i s time.

of
the
i)
The
preference
P l a n n i n g Board f o r monetary u n i t s i s
not
unexpected
s i n c e p e o p l e do
u s u a l l y make d e c i s i o n s on t r a d e - o f f s
is
u s i n g t h e d o l l a r as a b a s i s .
I t
much e a s i e r
f o r a P l a n n i n g Board
member t o r e l a t e h i s a t t i t u d e t o w a r d
an
alternative
plan
when
the
trade-off
value
is
given
in
$/ton-sediment
rather
than bushels
of
corn/ton-sediment
or
v i s i t o r - d a y / b u s h e l of corn.

i i ) The above r e f e r e n c e i n a
trade-off
presentation
does n o t
impose any h a r d s h i p on t h e
SWT
method.
I t
i s always p o s s i b l e t o
select
the
monetary
objective
f u n c t i on
in
a
multiobjective
o p t i m i z a t i o n p r o b l e m as t h e p r i m a r y
in
the E-constraint
o b j e c t iv e
formulation.
I f such
does
not
e x i s t , t h e n one s h o u l d s e l e c t as t h e
primary objective,
that objective
which
can
serve
as
a common
denominator
for a
trading
base.
i t i s always p o s s i b l e
Furthermore,
t o g e n e r a t e a1 1 p o s s i b l e t r a d e - o f f s
between any two o b j e c t i v e s o n c e t h e
s e t \2.-. nAl
i s generated.Thiscan
be
done, as was m e n t i o n e d , by u s i n g t h e
formula

The
avai labi 1 i t y
to
the
planners o f the trade-off values a t
c o r r e s p o n d i n g l e v e l s o f achievement
of
v a r i o u s o b j e c t i v e s can s e r v e
s e v e r a l v e r y i m p o r t a n t purposes
in
the
p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g
process.
Among t h e s e a r e :
i)
The
identification
and
recognition o f the characteristics
with
each
planning
assoc i a t e d

-127-

subarea
(PSA) - - h y d r o l o g i c ,
geographic-morphologic,
land
and
soi 1
types,
econom i c ,
socio-economic,
and o t h e r s .
This
type o f
i n f o r m a t i o n should a s s i s t
the planner
in
maximizing
the
allocation
of
resources
on
a
bas i n w i d e
bas i s
within
the
u n a v o i d a b l e c o n s t r a i n t s and
thus
enhance t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f a c h i e v i n g
t h e p l a n n i n g o b j e c t i v e s and g o a l s .
ii)
The s e n s i t i v i t y
in
the
changes
of
the trade-off
values
among t h e a l t e r n a t i v e p l a n s
are
v a 1 uab 1 e
i n f o r m a t i on
to
the
planners.
I n summary, w h i l e t h e t r a d e - o f f
values
are
essential
in
the
generation o f
the surrogate worth
functions v i a
i n t e r a c t i o n between
a n a l y s t and d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and t h e
u l t i m a t e generation of a selected,
p r e f e r r e d , and a c c e p t a b l e p l a n u s i n g
t h e SWT method i n i t s e n t i r e t y ,
it
i s possible t o u t i l i z e the trade-off
v a l u e s and t o deduce many s e p a r a t e
conclusions
that
can
be
very
valuable
to
the
planners
and
decision-makers.
I n the applications of
the
s u r r o g a t e w o r t h - t r a d e o f f method i n
t h e Maumee R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y ,
the
method's f i n a l
phase,
namely, t h e
generation of
the surrogate worth
functions,
was
implemented.
The
intent of
these f u n c t i o n s
is to
essentially assist
i n representing
t h e decision-makers' preferences i n
the
selection
of
the
final
recommended p l a n .
I n t h i s study,
t h e r e was a
continuous and. close
interaction
between
the
analysts
and
the
decision-makers a t v a r i o u s l e v e l s o f
the decision-making hierarchy.
Each
of
these
levels
had
i t s own
i n f l u e n c e and i m p a c t on t h e s t u d y
outcome.
Very . o f t e n , t h e a n a l y s t s
were t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s t h e m s e l v e s .
The h i e r a r c h y o f
decision-makers
consisted
of
t h e P l a n n i n g Board
members and t h e i r c l o s e a s s o c i a t e s ,
who i n t u r n c e n t r a l i z e d t h e d a t a and
provided
the
needed
technical
i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e P l a n n i n g Board
this
members.
In
add i t i o n ,

h i erarchy
i n c 1 uded
the
Study
Manager,
his
staff,
and
his
associates a t the executive level o f
t h e G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission,
t h e G r e a t L a k e s B a s i n Commission
i-tself,
the
Citizens'
Advisory
Committee, t h e S t u d y Committee,
the
Steering
Committee,
the
Water
Resources
Council,
the
public
t h r o u g h v a r i o u s h e a r i n g s , and o t h e r
a g e n c i e s who w e r e n o t r e p r e s e n t e d i n
the
above
groups
of
the
decision-makers
but
who
have
influence i n the region.
I n summary, o f a l l
levels of
the decision-making hierarchy i n the
Maumee L e v e l - B
Study, t h e P l a n n i n g
B o a r d and t h e S t u d y Manager had t h e
most
i m p a c t on t h e s t u d y outcome.
Consequently,
in
generating
the
surrogate worth trade-off functions,
namely,
the
preferences
of
the
decision-makers
over
the
various
a l t e r n a t i v e Pareto optimal
plans,
only
t h e P l a n n i n g Board ( t h e S t u d y
Manager
i s t h e chairman of
the
Board)
was
requested t o s t a t e i t s
preferences.
T h i s was
done
by
s o l i c i t i n g t h e p r e f e r e n c e s o f each
P 1 ann i ng
Board
member.
The
r e s u l t i n g i n d i f f e r e n c e bands o f e a c h
P l a n n i n g B o a r d member d i d n o t a l w a y s
o v e r l a p , as w o u l d b e e x p e c t e d .
In
c o m p a r i n g t h e f i n a l recommended p l a n
and t h e d i s p l a y e d p r e f e r e n c e s o f t h e
B o a r d members,
however, i t becomes
evident that
t h i s plan coincides
w i t h the preferences o f t h e m a j o r i t y
o f t h e P l a n n i n g B o a r d members.
I t i s very d i f f i c u l t a t t h i s
t i m e t o a c c u r a t e l y assess t h e impact
that
the
generation
of
the
preferences (via the surrogate worth
f u n c t i o n s ) had on t h e p l a n w h i c h was
I t
recommended f o r f i n a l s e l e c t i o n .
i s much e a s i e r , however,
t o assert
that
the
availability
of
the
trade-off
v a l u e s among t h e v a r i o u s
objectives
and t h e
corresponding
Pareto-optimal
solutions
were
extremely valuable
i n helping the
decision-makers
understand
and
analyze
the
various a l t e r n a t i v e
p l a n s and u t l i m a t e l y h e l p e d g e n e r a t e
a recommended p l a n t h a t
i s more
A
r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e b a s i n ' s needs.
major
gap
between t h e p l a n n i n g
p r o c e s s and t h e
implementation of

-128-

t h e r e s u l t i n g p l a n s was d i s c o v e r e d
as a consequence o f
the generation
and d i s p l a y o f t h e t r a d e - o f f v a l u e s
as t h e y
r e l a t e d t o the
various
p l a n n i n g subareas.

Question 25.
A hierarchical multiobjective
m o d e l i n g and o p t i m i z a t i o n s t r u c t u r e
was
developed
for
handling
c o m p r e h e n s i v e p l a n n i n g i n t h e Maumee
River Basin.
Two m a j o r components
o f noncommensuration were i d e n t i f i e d
in
modeling
the
problem:
one
r e l a t e s t o economic o b j e c t i v e s
and
the other
t o environmental q u a l i t y
as a f f e c t e d b y p o i n t and n o n p o i n t
source
pollutants,
recreation,
w i l d l i f e , etc.
A computer p r o g r a m was w o r k e d
o u t whch
i s capable o f g e n e r a t i n g
a l t e r n a t i v e p o l i c i e s and p l a n n i n g
a c t i v i t i e s and
their
associated
trade-offs using the surrogate worth
trade-off
method.
The a n a l y s i s was
c a r r i e d out w i t h r e s p e c t t o each o f
t h e f i v e p l a n n i n g subareas t h a t a r e
based on s t a t e and c o u n t y b o u n d a r i e s
i n the
basin.
The
level
of
objectives
and
appropriate
trade-offs
among
the
various
a
o b j e c t i v e s were d e t e r m i n e d f o r
range o f f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e plans:
minimum
environmental q u a l i t y (EQ),
EQ,
economic
development
(ED),
minimum E D , and a recommended p l a n .
As
i n f e r r e d b y name,
minimum E Q
p l a c e s somewhat
l e s s emphasis on
environmental q u a l i t y i n comparison
with
t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l q u a l i t y (EQ)
p l a n , w h i l e minimum E D p l a c e s l e s s
emphasis on economic d e v e l o p m e n t i n
compar i s o n
with
the
econom i c
d e v e 1 opment (ED) p 1 an.
The SWT method m i g h t b e v i e w e d
at
this
stage of
the planning
p r o c e s s as a " s i m u l a t i o n " method.
This d i s t i n c t a t t r i b u t e of
the
SWT method i s n o t a b l e i n l i g h t o f
the
present
proliferation
of
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
methodologies
developed
for
water
resources
p l ann i ng

Question 26
Recognition o f
the f a c t
that
t h e term " o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n ' ' p e r t a i n s
t o t h e m o d e l ' s o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n and
not necessarily t o the r e a l system's
o p t i m a l s o l u t i o n would h e l p reduce
some
of
the misgivings o f
the
p r a c t i o n e r s and a t t h e same t i m e
help
the
m o d e l e r s and a n a l y s t s
d e v e l o p a more sober a t t i t u d e t o w a r d
the
phrase.
Furthermore,
the
model's optimal
s o l u t i o n and t h e
v a r i o u s s c e n a r i o s and a l t e r n a t i v e
plans that
c o u l d be g e n e r a t e d v i a
t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l models s h o u l d b e
i n v a l uab 1 e
tool s
in
the
decision-making process
i n general
and i n w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g i n
For t h e Maumee R i v e r
particular.
B a s i n Level-B
Study,
the "optimal
solution"
of
the
real
system
depended upon t h e v a l u e system o f
the
decision-makers.
The
a l t e r n a t i v e s were n o t e v a l u a t e d on a
common b a s i s , such as d o l l a r s t o be
compared d i r e c t l y a g a i n s t c o s t , b u t
u t i l i z e d output,
such
as
acres
prevented
from f l o o d i n g ,
visitor
days, e t c .
Consequently,
t h e SWT
method
provided
as
good
an
evaluation o f the r e l a t i v e merits o f
the multiple objectives
as
was
available.
The d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s were
at first
reluctant
t o accept t h e
results of
t h e SWT method
but,
l a c k i n g a m o r e d e f i n i t i v e method o f
t h e i r own and b e i n g r e q u i r e d b y t h e
SWT p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o s t a t e t h e i r
p r e f e r e n c e s more s u c c i n c t l y ,
they
derived
a b e n e f i t f r o m t h e SWT
method
in
dec i d i ng
which
a l t e r n a t i v e s t o recommend.

Question 27
The P l a n n i n g B o a r d made i t s
recommendations
to
the
Bas i n
Commission
and
furnished
the
comments o f t h e C i t i z e n s '
Advisory
Committee o n t h e s e v e r a recommended
alternatives.
The Bas n Commission
h e l d a s e r i e s o f p u b l i c meetings t o
o b t a i n the views o f
the general
public
i n a d d i t i o n t o those o f t h e
C i t i z e n s ' A d v i s o r y Comm t t e e who, by
and l a r g e , a t t e n d e d t h e m e e t i n g s i n

-129-

their
own a r e a s
t o make t h e f i n a l
recommendations f o r
transmittal
to
their
governors
and
t h e Water
Resources C o u n c i l .

Question 28
This question
implies funding
for
the implementation of the f i n a l
plan.
The f i n a l
plan
was
not
implemented n o r was i t f i n a n c e d f o r
implementation.
However,
as
r e c e n t l y as 1982, t h e s t a t e o f
Ohio
I S
continuing
to
evaluate
recommendations f o r w a t e r
resources
projects i n the basin i n r e l a t i o n t o
the
i n f o r m a t i o n presented
i n the
plan t o assist
i n the judgmental
processes f o r
approval o f
plans.
Therefore,
whi l e
no
direct
is
implementation
of
the
plan
i n v o l v e d , i t i s b e i n g u t i l i z e d as a
s t a n d a r d f r o m w h i c h t o gauge o t h e r
plans.

Question 29
No
systematic
post-planning
e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e o v e r a l l p l a n has
been c o m p l e t e d t o t h e knowledge o f
t h e f o r m e r B a s i n Commission s t a f f .
Some p o s t - p l a n n i n g
e v a l u a t i o n has
been
undertaken
i n each o f
the

s t a t e s i n c o n s i d e r i n g work
t o be
endorsed.
The recommendations w i t h
regard t o types o f
agricultural
p r a c t i c e s t o be u n d e r t a k e n a r e b e i n g
i n t r o d u c e d t o an i n c r e a s i n g degree
throughout the basin.

6. Planning Stage 5:
Design

Project

Question 30
Q u e s t i o n 30 does n o t a p p l y t o
the state of planning or the level
of planning f o r
t h e Maumee R i v e r
Basin Study.

Acknowledgements
P a r t i a l support f o r t h i s study
was p r o v i d e d b y t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e
ENG79-03605,
Foundation,
G r a n t No.
under
the project
titles,
"The
I n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e H i e r a r c h i c a l and
Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Approaches," and t h e
the
U n i t e d S t a t e s Department o f
Energy,
Contract
No.
DEACO-180RA50256, u n d e r t h e p r o j e c t
title,
"Industry
Functional
M o d e l i n g . " S p e c i a l t h a n k s a r e due t o
J u l i a Pet-Edwards f o r h e r a s s i s t a n c e
i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s document.

References
Chankong,
V.,
and Y . Y .
Ha i mes ,
M u l t i o b j e c t i v e D e c i s i o n Making:
Theory
and
Methodo 1 ogy ,
Elsevier-North
Holland,
New
Y o r k , 1983 ( i n p r e s s

G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Cornmission,
"A
F irst-Cut
Presentation
of
Planning,
Maumee R i v e r
Basin
4, Ann
L e v e l - B S t u d y , " MRB S e r .
Arbor,
Mich.,
1974.

C i titens'
Advisory
Committee,
" T e n t a t i v e G o a l s and O b j e c t i v e s :
Maumee
R iver
Bas i ns Leve 1 -B
S t u d y , " MRB S e r .
2, G r e a t Lakes
Basin
Commission,
Ann A r b o r ,
M i c h , 1974.

G r e a t Lakes B a s i n Commission,"Maumee
R i v e r B a s i n S t u d y , " 113 p p . , Ann
A r b o r , M i c h . , May 1977.

Das, P . , "H i e r a r c h i c a 1 -mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e

approach
i n t h e p l a n n i n g and
management o f w a t e r and r e l a t e d
1 and
resources ,I'
Ph.D.
dissertation,
Case
Western
Reserve U n i v e r s i t y ,
Cleveland,
O h i o , 1976.

Great
Lakes
Basin
Commission,
R iv e r
Bas i n S t u d y ,I '
"Maumee
Report-Environmental
Impact
S t a t e m e n t , May 1977.
Haimes,Y.Y.
and
W.A.
Hal 1 ,
"Mu 1 t i o b j e c t i v e s
in
Water
R e s o u r c e s Systems A n a l y s i s :
The
Surrogate
Worth
Trade-off
Water
Resources
Method, I '
10, No.
4, Aug.
Research, v o l .

1974.

-130-

Haimes, Y . Y . , W . A .
H a l l , and H.T.
F r eedman,
Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e s
Optimization
i n Water R e s o u r c e s
Systems:
The S u r r o g a t e W o r t h
E 1 sev i e r ,
Trade-off
Method,
Amsterdam, 1975.
Haimes, Y . Y . ,
Hierarchical
Analyses
of
Water
R e s o u r c e s Systems:
M o d e l i n g and O p t i m i z a t i o n
of
Large-scale
Sys tems,
M c G r a w - H i l l , New Y o r k , 1977.
Haimes, Y . Y . ,
P.
Das, K .
Sung, and
J.
Craig,
"Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
Analysis
i n t h e Maumee R i v e r
A Case S t u d y o n L e v e l - B
Basin:
P 1 ann i ng, I ' Sys tems Eng i n e e r i n g
D e p a r t m e n t , Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e
U n i v e r s i t y , J a n u a r y 1977.
Haimes, Y . Y . ,
P.
Das, and K .
Sung,
"Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e A n a l y s i s i n t h e
Maumee
River Basin:
A
Case
S t u d y o n L e v e l - B P l a n n i n g , " Case
Western
Reserve
University,
C l e v e l a n d , O h i o , 1977.
Haimes, Y . Y . ,
P.
Das, and K .
Sung,
"Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e Ana 1 y s i s i n t h e
Maumee
River Basin:
A Case
Study,"
Case W e s t e r n
Reserve
University,
Cleveland,
Ohio,

.1979.
Haimes, Y . Y .
(editor),
Scientific,
T e c h n o l o g i c a l , and I n s t i t u t i o n a l
Aspects
of
Water
Resources
P o l i c y , Westview P r e s s , B o u l d e r ,
C O ~ O . , 1980.
Haimes, Y . Y . ,
"The
S u r r o g a t e Worth
Trade-off
(SWT)
Method and I t s
Extensions,"
in
Mu1 t i p l e
Criteria
Decision
Mak i ng:
G.
Theory
and
Applications,
Fandel
and T.
Gal,
editors,
S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , New Y o r k , 1980,
pp.
85-108.

Putman,
J.W.,
"Multiple
Objective
Resource
Evaluation
System
(MORE) , I ' N o r t h C e n t r a l
Resource
Program Group, Economic Research
U.S.
Department o f
Service,
Agriculture,
East
Lans i ng,
M i c h . , 1975.
S o i l Conservation Service,
"Erosion
and
Sedimentation
Technical
Paper , I ' submi t t e d t o t h e G r e a t
Lansing,
Lakes B a s i n Comm., E .
Mich., 1974.
Sung ,
K. ,
"Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
Optimization
and H i e r a r c h i c a l
Overlapping
Coordination
in
Water
R e s o u r c e s System,'' Ph.D.
dissertation,
Case
Western
Reserve U n i v e r s i t y ,
Cleveland,
Ohio, 1978.

U.S.

Congress,
"Federal
P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l Act,"
Law 92-500, 1972.

Water
Public

Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l ,
Principles
and S t a n d a r d s f o r P l a n n i n g Water
and R e l a t e d Land Resources, Fed.
Regist.,
3 8 ( 1 7 4 ) , p a r t I l l , 24,
77-24,869, S e p t .
10, 1973.
Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l , 1 9 7 2 , OBERS
Projections:
Economic A c t i v i t y
b y Economic Area,
i n t h e U.S.
Water
Resources
Region
and
Subarea, S t a t e s ,
and SMSA and
Non-SMSA
P o r t i o n s o f t h e Areas,
H i s t o r ica 1
and
Projected
1929-2020,
report,
Washington,
D.C.,
1974.

-131-

THE PLANNING PROCESS IN THE METROPOLITAN

ADELAIDE WATER RESOURCES STUDY OF JUNE 1978

David T. Howell
Department of Water Engineering
School of Civil Engineering
The University of New South Wales
Kensington, N e w South Wales
Australia

Introduction
Adelaide
is
the
capital
c i t y and t h e l a r g e s t c i t y o f t h e
s t a t e of South A u s t r a l i a , w h i c h
is
the d r i e s t
state
of the country
which
occupies
the
wor I d ' s
driest
c o n t i n e n t (see F i g u r e )
Metropo i t a n
Adelaide
had
in
1982 a p o p u l a t i o n o f a l m o s t one
million
I t draws i t s w a t e r
from
storage
o n n e a r b y s t r e a m s and,
increasingly,
from
the
c o m p a r a t i v e l y l a r g e and r e l i a b l e
f l o w o f t h e R i v e r M u r r a y . However,
w a t e r f r o m t h e R i v e r Murray i s more
s a l i n e and more t u r b i d t h a n f r o m
t h e nearby streams.

1.
Planning
Project Initiation and
Planning

Stage
1:
Preliminary

Question I
The p r o j e c t was
i n i t i a t e d on
t h e b a s i s o f a l o n g - t e r m programme.
The
M e t r o p o l i t a n A d e l a i d e Water
Resources S t u d y , begun i n 1976 and
completed
in
1978,
was
an
investigation
i n t o how t o p r o v i d e
a
water
SUPP 1 Y
for
m e t r o p o l i t a n A d e l a i d e over t h e n e x t
30 y e a r s .

Question 2
The
only
agency
directly
i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o j e c t was
the
Engineering
and
Water
Supply
I t
Department o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a .
was r e s p o n s i b l e a t t h e t i m e of t h e
s t u d y t o t h e M i n i s t e r o f Works and
i s now r e s p o n s i b l e t o t h e M i n i s t e r
of
Water
Resources
(of
the
Government o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a ) f o r
r u r a l and u r b a n w a t e r
supplies,

amongst
other
things,
throughout
the state.
I t s Director-General
and E n g i n e e r - i n - C h i e f i s c u r r e n t l y
the
Cha i rman
of
the
South
A u s t r a l i a n Water R e s o u r c e s C o u n c i l ,
on which a
number
of
bodies
concerned
with
water
are
r e p r e s e n t e d , and w h i c h i s c o n c e r n e d
w i t h an
i n t e g r a t e d approach
to
water
r e s o u r c e s management f o r t h e
state.
The E n g i n e e r i n g and Water
Supply Department
also
interacts
w i t h t h e R i v e r M u r r a y Commission, a
body on w h i c h a r e r e p r e s e n t e d t h e
governments o f t h e s t a t e s o f
South
Australia,
V i c t o r i a and New S o u t h
Wa 1 es
and
the
Commonwealth
Government ( t h e f e d e r a l
government
of
Australia).
The R i v e r M u r r a y
Commission a d m i n i s t e r s t h e R i v e r
Murray
Waters
Agreement
(an
inter-state
compact)
which
a l l o c a t e s among t h e s t a t e s w a t e r
from t h e R i v e r Murray on which
A d e l a i d e depends h e a v i l y .
The s k i l l e d p e r s o n n e l i n v o l v e d
i n the
planning
process
were
e n g i n e e r s and an e n g i n e e r - e c o n o m i s t
o f t h e E n g i n e e r i n g and Water S u p p l y
Department.
Public participation
was n o t e x p l i c i t l y i n v o l v e d i n t h e
formu 1 a t i on o f p r o j e c t o b j e c t i v e s ,
b u t r e p o r t s o n t h e s t u d y were made
a v a i l a b l e f o r p u b l i c s c r u t i n y and
comment.
T h e r e has been s u b s e q u e n t
i n v o 1 vement
in
demand
pub1 i c
management and i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t
of
a
corporate
plan for
the
Department.
(See a l s o t h e answer
t o Question 13).

Question 3
The i n v e s t i g a t i o n , w h i c h l e d t o
a programme o f
recomendations f o r
works c o n s t r u c t i o n over a p e r i o d o f

-132-

t i m e and f o r
particular
operating
policies,
was
initiated
by
a
r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t the q u a l i t y of the
w a t e r s u p p l y had t o be
improved,
that
public
f u n d s were becoming
s c a r c e and w e r e
l i k e l y t o remain
scarce
for
many
years,
that
continuing supply
t o the c i t y of
A d e l a i d e was becoming i n c r e a s i n g l y
dependent o f t h e R i v e r Murray,
and
that
the r a t e o f p o p u l a t i o n growth
o f t h e c i t y had d e c l i n e d s i n c e t h e
completion o f
t h e p r e v i o u s major
i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n 1973.

Question 4
The
only
constraints
were
self-imposed.
They w e r e t h a t
the
s t u d y s h o u l d b e c o m p l e t e d i n two
years,
and t h a t i t s h o u l d d e a l w i t h
t h e problem o f
providing Adelaide
w i t h w a t e r o v e r t h e n e x t 30 y e a r s .

Question 5
The
methods
employed
were
d e v e l o p e d by t h e o f f i c e r s o f
the
Department,
most 1 y
younger
engineers.
There
were
no
disagreements.

2.
Planning Stage 2:
Data
Collection and Processing

Question 7
E x i s t i n g d a t a were supplemented
50
separate
sets
of
with
s y n t h e t i c a l l y generated data.
Each
5et
consisted
of
generated
streamflows
a t ten
l o c a t i o n s and
generated
demands
at
eight
locations.
The demands were d e r i v e d
from
generated
rainfall
and
rainfall/consumption
correlations.
N e t e v a p o r a t i o n l o s s e s were a l s o
generated.
F o r e c a s t s o f demand o v e r
t h e p l a n n i n g p e r i o d were made.
A l l
measurements
are
being
continued d u r i n g the construction
w i l l
be
continued
period
and
indefinitely into the future.

Question 8
Operations
research techniques
were n o t u s e d t o d e c i d e o n t h e
method
of
data
c o l l e c t i o n and
length of data.

Question 9
A
programme was n o t s e t u p t o
assess t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f t h e d a t a
b a s e used.

Question 10
No s p e c i a l methods
t o analyse t h e data

Question 6

were

used

D a t a used c o m p r i s e d :
S t r e a m f l o w and r a i n f a l l r e c o r d s
f o r t h e Adelaide Region ( t h e area o f
l o c a l supply) ;

3.
Planning Stage 3:
Formulation and Screening of
Project Alternatives

Question 7 7
Streamflow
R i v e r Murray;

records

for

the

Consumption r e c o r d s f o r w a t e r
i n A d e l a i d e f o r d i f f e r e n t consumer
c l a s s e s and s u b - a r e a s ( o v e r t h e a r e a
o f consumption) ;
E v a p o r a t i o n and r a i n f a l l
for
different
locations
Adelaide a t
r e p r e s e n t i n g d i f f e r e n t sub-areas;
Population records i n d i f f e r e n t
sub-a r eas
(and
population

The e n t i r e
study
(Planning
1
to 4
inclusive)
took
Stages
approximately
ten
man-years
of
p r o f e s s i o n a l e f f o r t w i t h about t h e
same
amount
of
sub-professional
support.
The s t u d y was
internally
funded
as p a r t o f
the ordinary
Use
e x p e n d i t u r e of t h e D e p a r t m e n t .
was made o f
the South A u s t r a l i a n
Data
Government's
Automatic
Processing
Centre
which
had a
C o n t r o l D a t a Cyber 7 3 .

-133-

Question 17

Question 12
The o n l y s u p p o r t
from ouside
t h e D e p a r t m e n t was a s s i s t a n c e i n
making p o p u l a t i o n
forecasts
by
o t h e r s t a t e government d e p a r m e n t s .

Question 13
The p u b l i c d i d n o t p a r t i c i p a t e
in
the
planning
and
at all
decisionm a k i n g p r o c e s s , because,
so f a r ,
the
issues
have
been
simple, t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s s i m i l a r i n
their
social
and e n v i r o n m e n t a l
impacts,
and
non-one's
special
i n t e r e s t s have y e t been s e r i o u s l y
threatened.
The E n g i n e e r i ng and
Water
S u p p l y Department
is
not
averse t o p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n ; i t
i n i t i a t e d a pub1 i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n
programme
i n 1976 i n c o n n e c t i o n
w i t h R i v e r Murray s a l i n i t y c o n t r o l
( A l l e n and K i l l i c k , 1979).

Question 14
Thirteen d i s t i n c t alternatives
were
investigated,
al 1
in
sufficient
detal 1
to
enable
" i n d i c a t i v e " c o s t s t o be e s t i m a t e d .
The a l t e r n a t i v e s c o n s i d e r e d were
d e c i d e d o n b y t h e members o f
the
s t u d y team as an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f
the study.

Question 15
The s t a n d a r d p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g
procedure o f
t h e Department was
f o l lowed whereby
the project
is
c o n t i nua 1 1 y
as
it
d i scussed
progresses w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n f l o w i n g
upwards t h r o u g h t h e h i e r a r c h y o f
responsibility
to
sen io r
management.
I n t h i s case t h e v i e w s
f l o w i n g back down t h e h i e r a r c h y
were c o n f i r m a t o r y .
In addition,
e v e r y month b r i e f
summaries
of
p r o g r e s s were s e n t t o t h e South
A u s t r a l i a n Water Resources C o u n c i l
These
and
to
the
Minister
1 it t l e
resu1 ted
in
very
disagreement.

Question I 6
No c o n s t r a i n t s were

rnposed.

Multi-dimensional
simulation
w i t h time d i s c r e t i z e d
i n t o months
and w i t h s y n t h e t i c a l l y
generated
i n p u t s was u s e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h
hierarchical
two- 1 e v e 1
decomposition
and
deterministic
dynamic p r o g r a m m i n g f o r s u b - s y s t e m
optimization.
The
hierarchica!
d e c o m p o s i t i o n was a d a p t e d f r o m t h e
a p p r o a c h p r o p o s e d b y Haimes and
Macko
(1973)
The
dynamic
programming model was d e v e l o p e d t o
s u i t the circumstances
of
the
problem.
The o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n
was
t o m i n i m i z e pumping c o s t s o v e r
t h e 30-year p l a n n i n g p e r i o d s u b j e c t
to
system
component
capaci t y
constraints
and
minimum t a r g e t
storage levels representing levels
o f s e c u r i t y or r i s k .

Question 18
To t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e m o d e l s
d e a l t w i t h v o l u m e s o f w a t e r and
c o s t s o f pumping,
c a l i b r a t i o n and
verification
were n o t r e q u i r e d .
Testing
and
modification
were
concerned
with
computational
e f f i cacy

Question 19
The e x p e r t s recommended t h e
f i r s t stages o f a f i n a l
p l a n - and
the deferment o f
some d e c i s i o n s
until
later
t o the Minister.
The
M i n i s t e r and t h e S o u t h A u s t r a l i a n
Government
accepted
the
recommendations.
The p u b l i c was
informed,
and t h e r e was no a d v e r s e
reaction.

Question 20
The p l a n n i n g team was composed
mostly o f engineers.
The m a j o r i t y
were c i v i l e n g i n e e r s , b u t t h e r e was
one
electrical
engineer w i t h a
specialisation
in
operational
research.
One
of
the
civil
e n g i n e e r s was a l s o an e c o n o m i s t .
Other
d i s c i p l i n e s were i n v o l v e d i n
population forecasting.
To t h i s
extent
the
study
was
interdisciplinary,
with the
mix
seeming t o be a p p r o p r i a t e .

-134-

4.
Planning Stage 4:
Development of Final Project
Specifications

Question 21
In
and 4
answer
answers

t h i s s t u d y , P l a n n i n g Stages
were n o t d i s t i n c t , and t h e
t o Q u e s t i o n 1 7 above p a r t l y
Q u e s ti on 2 1

The f o l l o w i n g paper and

were h e l p f u l :

books

s u g g e s t i o n o f t h e Department t o t h e
decision-maker,
i.e., the Minister,
who a p p r o v e d .
What was l e a r n e d f r o m
i t were t h e c o n c l u s i o n s made i n t h e
report
on
the
study
and t h e
recommendations f o l l o w i n g f r o m them.
T h a t i s t o say t h a t
the cost
risk
analysis
lay a t the heart of the
method used t o draw c o n c l u s i o n s .
Other
impacts
were
c o n s i d e r e d i n any d e t a i l .

not

Question 24
Haimes, Y . Y . ,
and Macko,
D.,
"Hierarchical
Structures
i n Water
Resources Systems Management,'' I E E E
T r a n s a c t i o n s o n Systems,
Man,
and
C y b e r n e t i c s , .. J u l y ,
1973,
pp.
396-402.
Macko, D., and
M e s a r o v i c , M.D.,
Takarrara, Y . , T h e o r y o f H i e r a r c h i c a l
M u l t i l e v e l Systems, Academic
Press,
New Y o r k , 1970.
B e l lman,
R.E.,
and
Dreyfus,
S.E.,
A p p l i e d Dynamic Programming,
P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1962.
There
were
some
small
simplifications of
t h e problem t o
g i v e a s i m p l e r model.
For i n s t a n c e ,
a c o u p l e o f r e s e r v o i r s were
lumped
and a pumping s t a t i o n was o m i t t e d .
A l s o t h e d i v i s i o n i n t o subsystems
i n v o l v e d some s i m p l i f i c a t i o n .
The
model was n o t " o p t i m i z e d " .
The
a l t e r n a t i v e s a v a i l a b l e d i d n o t seem
t o b e many; t h e c h o i c e came down t o
b r u t e f o r c e s i m u l a t i o n or dynamic
programming w i t h d e c o m p o s i t i o n ,
and
the
l a t t e r was c h o s e n o n g r o u n d s o f
economy i n c o m p u t i n g .
The a p p r o a c h
wou 1 d
be
used
again.
The
d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e model
t o o k many
months.

Question 22
A cost benefit analysis
was n o t u n d e r t a k e n ; r a t h e r ,
r i s k a n a l y s i s was made.
I
more a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e
and w o u l d b e u s e d a g a i n .

as such
a cost
t seemed
circum-

Question 2 3
A r i s k analaysis
2 2 above)
was

(See Q u e s t i o n
made a t t h e

I t so happened. t h a t
i t was
p o s s i b l e t o make i m m e d i a t e d e c i s i o n s
without having t o
consider
the
trade-off
between c o s t and r i s k o r
any o t h e r t r a d e - o f f .
The
immediate
involving
the
dec i s i o n ,
configuration within
the
supply
network o f water
treatment plants
to
be
and
their
capacities
constructed
w i t h i n t h e n e x t few
y e a r s , was made o n a s i m p l e c o s t
minimizing basis.

However, t h e s t u d y
the
major
trade-off
f u t u r e decision-making.

highlighted
issues for

A multi-objective
optimization
methodology
was
not
used;
environmental issues d i d n o t a r i s e
because
alternatives
had
a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same i m p a c t s among
those
i n v o 1 ved
in
immediate
dec i s i ons ,
and
comprom i se among
objectives
has b e e n d e f e r r e d f o r
l a t e r decisions.
The i n v o l v e m e n t o f
decision-makers
(at
the
various
l e v e l s ) i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s has
b e e n g i v e n i n t h e answer t o Q u e s t i o n

15.
The
conclusions
and
recommendations t h a t c a n be s h a r e d
are
that
i n an a m i a b l e s o c i a l
e n v i r o n m e n t d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g i s easy,
and
that
sometimes
difficult
decision-making
problems
c a n be
deferred

Question 25
As i n d i c a t e d i n t h e answer
to
Question
24 above,
no t r a d e - o f f
a n a l y s i s was made,
because i t was
possible to defer i t .

-135-

Question 26
The d e c i s i o n - m a k e r
d i d accept
t h e " o p t i m a l " s o l u a t i o n generated by
model
and
d i d accect
+he
the
a p p r o a c h w i t h o u t s u p p l e m e n t a t i o n by
i n f ormat ion", b u t t h e
" c o n v e n t i ona 1
procedures used a l r e a d y by o p e r a t o r s
with a "feel" for
t h e s y s t e m were
consistent with the results of t h i s
study.

done b y t h e P l a n n i n g S e c t i o n o f
the
Water
Resources
Branch.
The
approved recommendation f r o m
the
P1anni ng
Section
gave
a
c o n f i a u r a t i n n f o r a s v s t e m w i t h new
components
(in
t h i s case water
treatment
plants)
and
specified
capacities.
T h i s was g i v e n t o t h e
Design
Branch
and
created
no
dificulties.

Acknowledgement
Question 27
The f i n a l p l a n was s e n t i n t h e
form o f
a recommendation t o t h e
i t t o the
Minister,
who r e f e r r e d
Resources
South A u s t r a l i a n Water
Council f o r advice.
This Council i s
made
up
of
t h e heads o f
the
D e p a r t m e n t and
other
government
agencies
and
representatives of
major p u b l i c i n t e r e s t groups.
It,
in
i t s advice t o the M i n i s t e r ,
agreed w i t h
the
recommendation.
T h i s was
then agreed t o by t h e
Government o f S o u t h A u s t r a l i a .

Question 28
For f u n d i n g t h e f i n a l
plan,
long-established
p r o c e s s was used
of
arranging
for
State
Government
1 oan
funds
with
supplementation
f r o m Commonwealth
(federal) grants.

Question 2 9
A continuing
evaluation
is
being c a r r i e d out.
The p l a n n i n g
undertaken
in
the
study b e i n g
d e s c r i b e d has n o t
terminated,
nor
has c o n t i n u i n g e v a l u a t i o n c e a s e d .
F o r i n s t a n c e , work i s now p r o c e e d i n g
detailed
on t h e
development o f
o p e r a t i n g procedures w i t h updated
d a t a and m o d i f i e d m o d e l s .

5. Planning Stage 5:
Design

Project

Question 30
Wi'th t h e s t r u c t u r e t h a t
the
Eng i neer i ng
and
Water
Supply
Department
t h e n had, t h e s t u d y was

Thanks a r e due t o M r .
K.J.
Shepherd
of
t h e E n g i n e e r i n g and
Water
Supply
Department,
South
A u s t r a l i , f o r many c l a r i f i c a t i o n s .
Any o b s c u r i t i e s and m i s t a k e s a r e t h e
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the author.

References and Bibiliography

Allen,
C.M.,
and K i l l i c k ,
J.C.,
I ' Au t oc r ac y
or
Democracy?
Public
Involvement
in
Water
Resources P l a n n i n g , "
Hydrology
and Water R e s o u r c e s .Symposium,
1979,
Perth,
Institution
of
Engineers, A u s t r a l i a ,
Canberra,
A.C.T.,
1979, pp. 2 3 - 2 7 .
Bellman, R.E.,
and D r e y f u s ,
S.E.,
Applied
Dynamic
Programming,
P r i n c e t o n U n i v r s i t y P r e s s , 1962.
Eng i n e e r i ng
and
Water
SUPP 1 Y
Department,
South
Australia,
Metropolitan
Adelaide
Water
Resource Study, A d e l a i d e ,
South
Australia,
June
1978
(2
v o l umes)

Haimes,
Y.Y.,
and
Macko,
D.,
" H i e r a r c h i c a l S t r u c t u r e i n Water
R e s o u r c e s Systems Management,"
IEEE T r a n s a c t i o n s o n Systems,
Man, and C y b e r n e t i c s , J u l y 1973,
pp.
396-402.
A.F.,
and
Chong,
P.S.,
Herath,
"Secur i t y
and
Augmentation
Decision C r i t e r i a
i n a Complex
Water
Resources
S y s tern, I'
1978 9
Hydrology
Symposium,
of
Canberra
Institution
Engineers,
Aust.ra1 i a , C a n b e r r a ,
A.C.T.,
1978, pp. 109-113.

-136-

Lindner,
M.A.,
Samad,
F.A.,
and
D.T.,
"The
Use o f
Howel I ,
S y n t h e t i c Hydrology i n Decision
Making
in
a
Complex R i v e r
Val l e y , "
H y d r o l o g y and
Water
Resources
Symposium,
1980,
A d e l a i de,
Institution
of
Engineers,
A u s t r a l i a , Canberra,
A.C.T.,
1980, pp.
119-127.
Manoel, P.J.
and S c h o n f e l d t ,
C.B.,
"Economic
Optimization o f
an
Expanding
Water
SUPP 1 Y ,
Hydrology
Symposium,
1977 9
B r i sbane,
Institution
of
Engineers, A u s t r a l i a ,
Canberra,
A.C.T.,
1977, p p . 88-92.
Mesarovic,
M.D.,
Macko,
D.,
and
Y.,
Theory
of
Takahara,
H i e r a r c h i c a l M u l t i l e v e l Systems,
Academic p r e s s , New Y o r k , 1970.

---L37-

-139-

POST EVALUATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS

IN THE VISTULA RIVER BASIN, POLAND

Zdz is Iaw Kaczmarek

Institute of Geophysicis of the
Polish Academy of Sciences,
Water Resources Division
Janusz KINDLER
Institute of Environmental Engineering
Warsaw Technical University, Warsaw, Poland

1.

Preface

The f o l l o w i n g
p o s i t i o n s were
h e l d by t h e co-authors a t t h e t i m e
the V i s t u l a River Project ("Planning
Comprehensive
Development o f
the
V i s t u l a R i v e r System") was c o n d u c t e d
(1968-1971) :
Z d z i s l a w Kaczmarek:
Professor
and
Director,
Inst itute
of
Environmental
Engineering,
War saw
Techn i c a 1
University;
in
charge
of
the
inter-institutional
team o f P o l i s h
scientists
and
p r a c t i t i oners
developing p r o j e c t methodology.
Janusz K i n d l e r :
A c t i n g D i r e c t o r , Bureau o f
the
Plan o f Operation "Vistula"; P r o j e c t
to-Manager
responsible for project
m o b i l i z a t i o n and e x e c u t i o n j o i n t y
w i t h t h e P r o j e c t Manager a p p o i n t e d
b y t h e UNDP;
l a t e r Chief P r o j e c t
E n g i n e e r and member o f
t h e team
charged w i t h development o f
project
methodology.

2. Planning Stage 1:
Project
lnitation and Preliminary Planning

1953-1956
Sciences
i n t h e years
(time horizon o f
1975).
The p l a n
was
then twice revised i n the e a r l y
60s b y t h e N a t i o n a l Water A u t h o r i t y ,
and t h e t i m e h o r i z o n e x t e n d e d t o
1985. By 1968, i t became c l e a r t h a t
t h e water s i t u a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n
the V i s t u l a R i v e r Basin which covers
t h e c o u n t r y ' s area,
a b o u t 54% o f
required
spec i a 1
attention.
Preliminary
long-term p r o j e c t i o n s
d e v e l o p e d b y t h e P l a n n i ' n g Commission
and t h e P o l i s h Academy o f
Sciences
indicated that
the s t a t e o f water
a v a i l a b i l i t y i n t h e b a s i n was
not
c o m p a t i b l e w i t h f u t u r e demands.
In
1968, c o m p r e h e n s i v e s t u d i e s
were
i n i t i a t e d w i t h the assistance o f the
U n i t e d N a t i o n s Development p r o g r a m
and t h e U n i t e d N a t i o n s i t s e l f , u n d e r
t h e name o f
the "Vistula
River
Project"
("P 1 ann i ng Comprehens i v e
Development o f
the V i s t u l a River
System")

The g o a l o f t h e p r o j e c t was
to
resources
formu 1a t e
a
water
development
(investment)
program
c a p a b l e o f m e e t i n g demands p r o j e c t e d
I t was
t o t h e y e a r s 1985 and 2000.
assumed t h a t t h e p r o j e c t w o u l d make
u s e o f a l l p o s s i b l e improvements i n

Question 7

The f i r s t
long-term n a t i o n a l
w a t e r r e s o u r c e s d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n was
d r a f t e d b y t h e P o l i s h Academy o f

t h e m e t h o d o l o g y o f d e s i g n i n g and
operating
large-scale
and complex
w a t e r r e s o u r c e systems
(application
o f m a t h e m a t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s , computer
simulation,
and
the
1 ike).

-140-

C o n t i n u o u s r e v i s i o n and v e r i f i c a t i o n
o f plans i s unavoidable i n a r a p i d l y
e x p a n d i n g economy; t h e v a l u e o f
an
operational
too1
for
quick
evaluation of
t h e consequences
to
water
management
of
some
new
development
concepts
and
a l t e r n a t i v e s cannot be exaggerated.

Question 2
On
the
Pol i s h
side,
" H y d r o p r o j e k t " , a f i r m o f c o n s u l t i ng
engineers
operating
within
the
framework o f
the National
Water
was c h a r g e d w i t h t h e
Author i t y ,
p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t and
its
c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h a b o u t 40 r e s e a r c h
14
institutes
r e p r e s e n t i ng
m i n i s t r i e s c o n c e r n e d and
several
universities.
The d e v e l o p m e n t
of
p r o j e c t m e t h o d o l o g y was a s s i g n e d t o
a s p e c i a l l y c r e a t e d team o f a b o u t 20
specialists representing university
i n s t i t u t e s and v a r i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s
of
t h e N a t i o n a l Water
Authority.
From t h e UNDP s i d e , a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l
panel o f e x p e r t s a s i s t e d t h e P o l i s h
team t h r o u g h o u t t h e e n t i r e d u r a t i o n
of
the study.
Assistance
i n the
development o f
p r o j e c t methodology
was e n t r u s t e d b y t h e UNDP t o Water
I nc.,
Wa 1 n u t
Resources Eng i n e e r s ,
Creek, C a l i f o r n i a , U . S . A .
T h e r e was n o p u b l i c i n v o l v e m e n t
i n the project preparation.
Project
o b j e c t i v e s were f o r m u l a t e d by t h e
N a t i o n a l Water A u t h o r i t y .

Three-Step
Method i s composed o f
t h r e e computer
programs w h i c h a r e
applied sequentially
i n order to:
(I) d e t e r m i n e a s e t
of
target
releases f o r
individual reservoirs
i n t h e system, (2) d e v e l o p o p e r a t i n g
rules for the reservoirs given the
inflow
h y d r o l o g y and t h e t a r g e t
(3) determine
the
outflows,
and
optimal
allocation
of available
uses c o n s i d e r e d
water t o a l l water
i n t h e model,
giveri t h e o p e r a t i n g
Steps (1)
and
(3)
r u l e s from ( 2 ) .
were
based on t h e O u t - o f - K i l t e r
Algorithm,
which
is
a
special-purpose
l i n e a r programming
method d e r i v e d f r o m n e t w o r k
flow
theory.
S t e p (2) was based on t h e
method
developed
by Kornatowski
( 1 9 6 9 ) , e m p l o y i n g s t o c h a s t i c dynamic
of
the
programming.
Detai I s
Three-Step
Method a r e d e s c r i b e d b y
Kaczmarek e t a l .
(1971).
The
programs w e r e made o p e r a t i o n a l on
t h e P o l i s h - m a d e Odra 1204 and
1304
computers;
however,
they c o u l d n o t
b e combined i n t o a s i n g l e p r o g r a m
because o f
the limited capacity of
t h e machines a v a i l a b l e a t t h a t t i m e .
Under
the
circumstances,
implementation o f
t h e method was
r a t h e r d i f f i c u l t and a t t e n t i o n was
f o c u s e d on t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e
so-ca 1 1 ed
Single-Step
Met hod
( r e f e r r e d t o as t h e WRM M o d e l ) .
u t i 1 izes
the
That
m e t hod
Out-of-Kilter
Algorithm t o
solve
water
r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n problems
i n a complex m u l t i - r e s e r v o i r
system
(see K i n g e t a l . , 1971).

Question 3
See 1 above

Question 4
The o n l y c o n s t r a i n t s imposed o n
t h e s t u d y were t h o s e r e s u l t i n g f r o m
t h e Water
Law,
Water Q u a l i t y A c t ,
and o t h e r g o v e r n m e n t a l
d e c r e e s and
regulations
in force
i n Poland a t
the time o f p r o j e c t preparation.

Question 5
The m e t h o d o l o g i c a l work
was
first
organized
around a b a s i c
scheme p r o p o s e d b y t h e I n s t i t u t e o f
Environmental
E n g i n e e r i n g o f Warsaw
Technical U n i v e r s i t y .
The s o - c a l l e d

3.
Planning Stage 2:
Data
Collection and Processing
Question 6
A
starting
point
for
a
methodological
studies
was
p r o p o s a l made by t h e
Institute of
Environmental
Engineering,
Warsaw
Technical University, f o r a s p a t i a l
and- p r o b l e m - o r i e n t e d
decomposition
o f t h e system.
Such a d e c o m p o s i t i o n
was j u s t i f i e d by t h e e x c e p t i o n a l
s i z e o f t h e V i s t u l a R i v e r Basin, t h e
large
number
of
users,
the
c o m p l i c a t e d system s t r u c t u r e ,
and
the
limited
computer
facilities
available a t that
time.
I t was
d e c i d e d , t h e r e f o r e , t o decompose t h e

-141

b a s i n s p a t i a l l y i n t o 1 3 subsystems.
Each o f
these represents
an a r e a
whose
economic
structure
i s as
u n i f o r m as p o s s i b l e , w h i c h
i s of
homogeneous h y d r o l o g i c a l n a t u r e , and
which
creates
similar
hydraulic
e n g i n e e r i n g problems.
With regard t o problem-oriented
decomposition,
the
proposal--in
conformity
with
the
special
character o f water
management
in
Poland--was
d i r e c t e d mainly toward
t h e problem o f water supply f o r
the
population,
agriculture,
and
industry;
toward water
pollution
toward
independent
c o n t r o l ; and
investigation of
t h e most r a t i o n a l
solutions for flood control.

compilation,
criticial
evaluation,
and p r e p a r a t i o n o f
t h e s e d a t a has
been a s s i g n e d t o t h e N a t i o n a l Water
Authority
and
it s
agenc i e s ,
the
espec i a 1 1 y
"H yd r o p r oj ek t"
p r e v i o u s l y mentioned.

15
For w a t e r
supply studies,
years o f
historical
mean m o n t h l y
Di fferent
flows
were
used.
h y d r o l o g i c d a t a w e r e used f o r t h e
water
quality
studies,
flood
c o n t r o l , and hydropower p r o d u c t i o n .
Question 7
O n l y e x i s t i n g d a t a were used
after
t h e i r i n t e n s i v e p r o c e s s i n g as
t o m a t c h r e q u i r e m e n t s o f methods
employed f o r p r o j e c t p r e p a r a t i o n .

The
l i s t of
water
control
objectives
identified
in
the
" V i s t u l a River Project'' included:

Question 8a.

No.
Water
supply
to
population, agriculture
industry;

the
and

Question 8b
No

Maintenance of
t h e minimum
acceptable
flows
(established via a detailed
study o f
t h e environmental
effects of
various minimum
flows) ;
Water p o l l u t i o n c o n t r o l ;
Flood c o n t r o l ;
Development o f
facilities;

recreational

Development o f
hydropower
product ion
and
i n l and
n a v i g a t i on,
t a k i ng
into
consideration
the
effectiveness of alternative
power
production
and
t r a n s p o r t modes.

Question 9
No

Question 70.
R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was u s e d
of
water
for
estimation
requirements.
N e t w o r k f l o w methods
were
used
for
transferring
streamflow
data
from
gauging
stations
t o supply/use
balancing
nodes.

Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation
and Screening
of Project Alternatives
4.

Question I 7.
See P l a n n i n g S t a g e 1 .

The t a r g e t v a l u e s o f a l l w a t e r
control
objectives
have
been
established
by
the
specialized
agenc i es
(14
ministries
in
collaboration)
for
two l e v e l s o f
f u t u r e development,
1985 and 2000.
The common base f o r a l l p r o j e c t i o n s
has
been t h e n a t i o n a l
long-term
Final
development
plan.

Question 12.
Project
execu t io n
was
authorized
by
the
Governmental
Decree s p e c i f y i n g a l l
institutions
involved
and
ob1 i g i n g
them t o
m o b i l i z e a p p r o p r i a t e manpower and
f i n a n c i a l resources.

-142-

Question 73.
No p a r t i c i p a t i o n

Question 14.
. A l t o g e t h e r , 148 i n v e s t m e n t and
were
water
use
a 1 t e r n a t ives
analyzed--46 f o r t h e t i m e h o r i z o n o f
1985 and 102 f o r t h e y e a r 2000.
Alternatives
were
specified
by
"Hydroprojekt" w i t h the assistance
o f t h e m i n i s t r i e s concerned.

Question 75.
Conflicts
i n water
u s e were
a n a l y z e d by a s s i g n i n g w e i g h t s t o
different
uses
reflecting
their
mutual
priorities.
The s y s t e m o f
p r i o r i t y w e i g h t s was d e v e l o p e d b y
t h e p r o j e c t team.

Question 20.
Yes,

5.

i t was.

Planning Stages 4 and 5

These s t a g e s d o n o t a p p l y
to
the level of planning i n the V i s t u l a
River Basin.

Question 76.
See Q u e s t i o n 4 above.

Question 77.

References

a)
The
WRM
Mode 1 ;
simulation/optimization
package f o r
analysis
of
water
resources
allocation,
including
reservoirs
operation.
b) The POWDYN Model;
dynamic
programming f o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e
optimal reservoir operating p o l i c i e s
f o r hydropower p r o d u c t i o n .
c) The POWREC Model; s i m u l a t i o n
f o r computation o f
t h e hydroenergy
outputs.
d) The m o d i f i e d SSARR
f l o o d propagation analysis.
A1 1
models
were
during the project.

f o r m e r N a t i o n a l Water
Authrority)
which
next presented a selected
a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e government f o r
f i na 1
aprova 1
In
1976,
the
government
a p p r o v e d t h e p l a n and
allocted
t h e necessary funds f o r
project
implementation
(detai led
alloction for
the nearest 5-year
plan
and
directional
allocation
I n 1978,
a
u n t i 1 t h e y e a r 2000).
new
o r g n i z a t i o n was
s e t up f o r
p r o j e c t implementation.
S i n c e 1980,
p r o j e c t i m p l e m e n t a t o n has been k e p t
reduced l e v e l
at a significantly
of
t h e o v e r a l l economic
because
d i f f i c u l t i e s o f the country.

Model;

developed

Question 18.
A l l models were t e s t e d t h r o u g h
application against detailed data i n
t h e m o s t complex o f t h e r i v e r b a s i n
subsystems.

Question 79.
" H y r o p r o j e k t " p r e s e n t e d a few
"best"
alternatives t o the Ministry
o f A g r i c u l t u r e (which r e p l a c e d t h e

Kaczmarek,
Z.,
K.
Krajewski,
T.
Kornatowski, A .
F i l i p k o w s k i , J.
Kindler,
and
D.F.
Kibler
(1971).
The M u l t i - S t e p Method
f o r S i m u l a t i o n and O p t i m i z a t i o n
of
Vistula
River
Planning
A l t e r n a t i v e s , i n Proceedings o f
on
the
Warsaw
Symposium
Mathematical
Mode 1 s
in
Hydro 1 ogy ,
International
Association
of
Hydrological
S c i e n c e s P u b l i c a t i o n No.
101,
Unesco, P a r i s , pp.
1072-1077.

J.
Filimowski,
and J.
King, I.P.,
K i nd 1 e r
(1971)
The
Out-of-Kilter
A l g o r i t h m as a
Single-Step
Met hod
for
S i m u l a t i o n and O p t i m i z a t i o n o f
Vi stula
River
P 1 a n n i ng
i n Proceedings of
Alternatives,
the
Warsaw
Sympos i um
on
Mathematical
Mode 1 s
in
International
Hydro 1 o g y ,
Association
of
Hydrological
101,
Sciences
P u b l i c a t i o n No.
Unesco, P a r i s .
pp.
1078- 1085.

K o r n a t o w s k i , T.
(1969).
Basis of
O p t i m a l Management o f a S i n g l e
Storage R e s e r v o i r ,
Publication
o f t h e Warsaw T e c h n i c a l U n i v e r s i t y .

-143-

DEVELOPMENT OF A WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

MODEL FOR THE SUSAA CATCHMENT IN DENMARK

Dan ROSBJERG
Associate Professor
Technical University of Denmark
DK -2800 Lyngby, Denmark

1.

Introduction

The S u s a a - P r o j e c t i s a 5 - y e a r
hydrological
research
project
initiated
i n 1977 as t h e D a n i s h
c o n t r i b u t ion
to
the
I HP
and
c o m p l e t e d i n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f 1982.
The Susaa
catchment
covers
approximately
750 s q u a r e k i l o m e t e r s
and i s s i t u a t e d i n t h e c e n t r a l
and
southern p a r t o f
Zealand 5 0 - 7 0 km
s o u t h - w e s t o f Copenhagen,
see F i g .
1.
The Susaa b a s i n i s u n d e r l a i n by
aqu i f e r
a
regional
a r t e s i an
consisting of
limestone
deposits
covered
b y semipermeable g l a c i a l
d e p o s i t s o f c l a y e y moraine.
The
water
SUPP 1 Y
of
is
m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and
industries
generally
based
on
distributed
low-intensive
groundwater
abstraction
schemes.
However,
a
centralized
high-intensive
groundwater
abstraction
for
the
benefit of
Copenhagen i s
located
j u s t outside the north-eastern p a r t
of
t h e catchment.
In
addition
Copenhagen u t i l i z e s t h e t w o l a k e s
H a r a l d s t e d so and G y r s t i n g e
s o as
supplementary
surface
water
reservoirs.
The
present
groundwater
a b s t r a c t i o n f o r i r r i g a t i o n purposes
i s rather limited, but the i n t e r e s t
f armers
has
increased.
among
E s p e c i a l l y t h e 1975-1977 d r o u g h t s
gave r i s e t o a boom i n l i c e n c e
applications.
Irrigation
based
resources
d i r e c t l y on s u r f a c e w a t e r

i s very
l i m i t e d and w i l l
not be
p e r m i t t e d i n t h e f u t u r e due t o l o w
flow
cond i t i o n s
d u r i ng
the
i r r i g a t i o n season.
Low f l o w a u g m e n t a t i o n b y means
o f groundwater
has n o t y e t b e e n
a p p l i e d i n Denmark.
The i n t e r e s t i n
investigating
this possibility of
eliminating
low f l o w c a l a m i t i e s i s ,
however, s t r o n g l y i n c r e a s i n g .
There a r e g r e a t
recreational
and c o n s e r v a t i o n i n t e r e s t s a t t a c h e d
t o the area.
Especially the lake
T y s t r u p and i t s s u r r o u n d i n g a r e a
is
a
site
of
g r e a t concern.
The
streams w i t h i n
the basin are
in
general
also subject
to
public
awareness
i n terms o f
both their
q u a l i t y and q u a n t i t y p r i m a r i l y f o r
the
purpose
of
ecology
and
recreation
including fishing
and
canoe i ng

The Susaa a s we1 1

as
its
t r i b u t a r i e s a c t as r e c i p i e n t s f o r
m u n i c i p a l sewage.
The w a s t e - w a t e r
treatment
plants
operate
at
different
levels,
b u t except f o r
some
minor
plants
with
only
mechanical
treatment
the
plants
provide
at
least
biological
treatment.
The n o r t h e r n p a r t o f t h e Susaa
c a t c h m e n t i s shown i n more d e t a i l i n
Fig.
2.
The management p a r t o f t h e
ent ir e
Susaa
project
is
in
particular
the subject
for
the
answering o f t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e .

-144-

ZEALAND

Fig. 2

ZeaZand and t h e l o c a t i o n of

t h e Susaa Catchment

-14 5-

U
U
3

-146-

2. Planning Stage 1:
Project
Initiation and Preliminary Planning
Question 1
I n 1970 t h e t o t a l
consumption
o f w a t e r i n Z e a l a n d was e s t i m a t e d t o
b e 35% o f t h e maximum amount w h i c h
was c o n s i d e r e d p o s s i b l e t o w i t h d r a w
without
p a y i n g any a t t e n t i o n t o t h e
environmental
consequences.
The
2000
was
demand f o r
the
year
f o r e c a s t e d t o be5O%. Thus, t a k i n g
a l s o t h e impact on t h e environment
i n t o account, s e r i o u s problems c o u l d
be foreseen.
the
The l a r g e s t e x p a n s i o n o f
w a t e r w i t h d r a w a l was p l a n n e d t o t a k e
place within
t h e Susaa b a s i n .
The
c i t i e s o f N a e s t v e d and e s p e c i a l l y
Copenhagen
were
carrying out a
series of preinvestigations, but the
for
the
final
deci s ion
implementation
of
t h e expansion
schemes was n o t t a k e n ,
one o f
the
reasons b e i n g t h e p u b l i c concern o f
As
p o s s i b l e e n v i r o n m e n t a l damages.
a
consequence o f
the
increasing
environmental
awareness,
the
Environmental A f f a i r s
M i n i s t e r for
a s k e d t h e D a n i s h N a t i o n a l Agency f o r
Environmental
P r o t e c t i o n and t h e
three regional
administrations
of
Z e a l a n d t o p l a n an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f
the ecological
consequences o f an
i n c r e a s i n g groundwater a b s t r a c t i o n
i n Zealand.
F o r t h e above m e n t i o n e d
r e a s o n s i t was d e c i d e d t o p e r f o r m
the
investigations
i n t h e Susaa
basin.
A t
that
t i m e t h e Danish
Committee f o r H y d r o l o g y was f o r m e d
as t h e c o m m i t t e e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e
i n t h e IHP.
Danish p a r t i c i p a t i o n
Because t h e o b j e c t i v e s
o f t h e IHP
corresponded v e r y w e l l
with
the
o b j e c t i ves
of
the
current
investigations,
the
comrn i t t e e
selected
the
Susaa b a s i n as a
research area.
The m a i n o b j e c t i v e
of
the
project
was
to
study
the
hydrological
and t o some e x t e n t t h e
e c o l o g i c a l and economic consequences
of
increased
water
resources
development:
and
to
develop
appropriate
tools
for
water
r e s o u r c e s management.

Seven
research
institutions
p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e Susaa p r o j e c t .
The s t u d y was f i n a n c e d by t h e D a n i s h
National
Agency o f
Environmental
P r o t e c t i o n , t h e Danish A g r i c u l t u r a l
and V e t e r i n a r y R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l , t h e
Danish
Natural
S c i e n c e Research
Council,
the
Danish
Technical
Research
Council
and t h e D a n i s h
N a t i o n a l Agency o f T e c h n o l o g y .

Question 2:
The Susaa r e s e a r c h programme
was o u t l i n e d by a w o r k i n g g r o u p
comprising r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f Danish
i n s t i t u t i o n s dealing w i t h hydrology.
The
sub-project
concerning
management o f
the water
resources
was p l a n n e d
i n d e t a i l by the three
1)
institutions taking p a r t herein:
Institute
of
Hydrodynamics
and
Hydraulic
Engineering,
Technical
U n i v e r s i t y o f Denmark, 2 ) t h e Water
Q u a l i t y I n s t i t u t e , and 3) t h e D a n i s h
Land
Development
Service.
The
D a n i s h Committee f o r H y d r o l o g y was
responsible
for
the
entire
Susaa-project.
The pub1 i c was n o t
involved d i r e c t l y .

Question 3:
One o f t h e m a i n r e a s o n s f o r t h e
successful a p p l i c a t i o n o f
financial
support
t o t h e p r o j e c t was
the
appearance o f a new w a t e r
resources
development
act
which requested
comprehensive
water
resources
planning
on
the regional
level
taking into consideration:
the
resources.

quantity

of

the

water

2 the
public,
industrial
and
a g r i c u l t u r a l needs, f o r a s u f f i c i e n t
water
supply,
both quantitatively
and q u a l i t a t i v e l y .
J(
envi ronmental
protection
(protection/conservation o f the the
environmental
and
recreational
va 1 ues)

5; o t h e r p u b l i c
among
those
the
materials.

considerations,
raw
use
of

-147-

Thus
the
planning
should
r e c o g n i z e and s o l v e t h e c o n f l i c t s
between t h e
different
interests
representing
water
supply,
waste
water
disposal,
irrigation,
r e c r e a t i o n and c o n s e r v a t i o n o f w e t
areas.
I t was commonly a g r e e d
hat
t h i s w o u l d r e q u i r e more i n s i g h t n t o
processes
and
the
h y d r o 1 og i c a 1
development
of
more a p p r o p r a t e
planning tools.

Question 4:
The c o n s t r a i n t s were p r i m a r i l y
of
a financial
character.
After
n e g o t i a t i o n s g i v i n g r i s e t o some
reductions
i n t h e proposal for t h e
r e s e a r c h programme, t h e p r o j e c t was
accepted
by
the
financial
i n s t i t u t i o n s m e n t i o n e d i n t h e answer
t o q u e s t i o n 1.

Question 5:
Because
a1 1
the
research
i n the
institutions participating
p r o j e c t as w e l l
as t h e f i n a n c i n g
i n s t i t u t i o n s were s t r o n g l y
involved
i n t h e p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g phase,
t h e f i n a l r e s e a r c h programme became
f u l l y accepted.
The
comprised:

entire

Field studies
processes.

Susaa

project

hydrologic

of

Mathematical m o d e l l i n g
of
h y d r o l o g i c p r o c e s s e s and s y s t e m s .
Management

of

water

resources.
The g e n e r a l
purpose o f
the
management p a r t o f t h e Susaa p r o j e c t
was
t o d e v e l o p m a t h e m a t i c a l models
suitable
for
water
resources
planning
purposes.
The v a r i o u s
p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r model f o r m u l a t i o n
was e v a l u a t e d
i n the preliminary
p l a n n i n g phase, and a combined model
which was a b l e t o s i m u l a t e t h e j o i n t
e f f e c t s o f water
a b s t r a c t i o n and
sewage
disposal
in
the
Susaa
c a t c h m e n t was f o u n d most c o n v e n i e n t
for
detailed
studies
of
the
consequences
o f various planning
schemes.

3.
Planning Stage 2:
Data
Collection and Processing

Questions 6 and 7:
H y d r o l o g i c and w a t e r
quality
d a t a were used t o c a l i b r a t e t h e
the t o t a l
simulation
submodels of
model.
The f o l l o w i n g
i s not a
complete d e s c r i p t i o n ,
but only a
l i s t i n g , w i t h t h e p u r p o s e t o g i v e an
idea
of
the
types
and
the
proportions of
the applied data,
which
partly
comprised
already
existing
data
and
p a r t l y data
c o l l e c t e d d u r i n g t h e p r o j e c t phase.
For t h e h y d r o l o g i c a l
submodels
s e r i e s o f p r e c i p i t a t i o n , streamflow,
potential
evapotranspiration,
and
temperature d a t a taken on a d a i l y
b a s i s from s e v e r a l s t a t i o n s i n t h e
basin
were
used.
Fur therrnor e,
groundwater l e v e l o b s e r v a t i o n s , l o n g
term as w e l l
as s h o r t t e r m
in
c o n n e c t i o n w i t h pumping t e s t s , w e r e
a p p l i ed.
Registrations
of
groundwater
abstractions
and
discharges o f waste water
treatment
p l a n t s were a l s o t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t .
Water q u a l i t y
streamflow data
were
collected
during
intensive
2-day
measurement p e r i o d s ,
where
primarily
t h e d i s c h a r g e and t h e
v a r i a t i on
in
the
oxygen
concentration
were
observed.
Further data f o r c a l i b r a t i o n o f the
s t r e a m f l o w q u a l i t y model were used
for
example t h e
load o f o r g a n i c
matter
originating
from d i f f u s e .
the
sources, p l u s t h e geornetrics o f
considered
streams.
The
water
qual i t y
of
lake
models
was
cal ibrated
on
the
bas i s
of
measurements o f
d a t a showing
the
primary production, concentration of
total
nitrogen,
t o t a l phosphorous,
oxygen, c h l o r o p h y l l , e t c .
intentions o f
the
One of t h e
p r o j e c t was
t o a n a l y s e examples o f
future dispositions
for
t h e water
r e s o u r c e on a b a s i s as r e a l i s t i c as
possible.
Therefore a large e f f o r t
was made t o c o l l e c t
precise data
with
regard
to
ex i s t i ng
dispositions,
forecasts
of
the
f u t u r e demands and t h e d i s p o s i t i o n
p l a n s a l r e a d y worked out.
These

-148-

p l a n s c o m p r i s e t h e development
of
waterworks
for
local supply i n the
Susaa c a t c h m e n t
and t h e s o - c a l l e d
paragraph 21 p l a n s f o r the f u t u r e
waste water
treatment w i t h i n the
b a s i n ( r e f e r r i n g t o paragraph 21
in
t h e Danish environmental p r o t e c t i o n
act)

Finally,
econom i c
data
c o n c e r n i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s and
o p e r a t i o n c o s t s o f w a t e r w o r k s and
waste water
t r e a t m e n t p l a n t s were
collected.
H e r e b y t h e consequences
o f various water
r e s o u r c e s schemes
c a n be compared a l s o
i n economic
terms.

Question 8:
No OR t e c h n i q u e was u s e d i n
c o n n e c t i o n w i t h d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and
processing.

model w a s o u t s i d e t h e scope o f
the
project.
The p r e l i m i n a r y p r o j e c t
phase c o v e r e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 6 months
i n which t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n a n a l y s i s
and f i n a l p r o j e c t s p e c i f i c a t i o n was
worked
out
by
a
study group
comprising representatives from the
three participating institutions.

Question 12.
D u r i n g t h e p r o j e c t p e r i o d some
of
the p a r t i c i p a t i n g
institutions
supported t h e p r o j e c t by a l l o c a t i n g
more r e s e a r c h manpower t h a n g r a n t e d
b y t h e f i n a n c i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s and by
providing
rooms
and s e c r e t a r i a l
assistance f r e e o f
charge f o r
the
project.

Question 13:
The p u b l i c d i d n o t p a r t i c i p a t e
i n t h e research p l a n n i n g process.

Question 9:
Question 14:
A d a t a b a n k was e s t a b l i s h e d f o r
a l l d a t a c o l l e c t e d as p a r t o f t h e
hydrological investigations
i n the
Susaa
area.
T h i s promoted t h e
exchange
of
data
between
the
s u b p r o j e c t s and e n s u r e d t h e s t o r a g e
o f data i n an o p e r a t i o n a l f o r m .

Question 10:
See t h e answers t o Q u e s t i o n s
and

7.

4.
Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation and Screening of
Project Alternatives

Question 11:
I n t h e management p a r t o f
the
i t was i n i t i a l l y a g r e e d
Sua-project
t h a t t h e m a i n a c t i v i t y s h o u l d be t o
d e v e l o p an o v e r a l l s i m u l a t i o n model
w h i c h was a b l e t o c a l c u l a t e t h e
of
water
integrated
effects
a b s t r a c t i o n and w a s t e w a t e r d i s p o s a l
i n t h e catchment,
by combining a
series
of
q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y
sub-models.
In
the
preliminary
phase o f
the p r o j e c t period the
possibilities
of
aPP1 Y i ng
o p t i m i z a t i o n m o d e l s w e r e examined i n
d e t a i l , b u t t h e c o n c l u s i o n was
that
d e v e l o p i n g an o v e r a l l o p t i m i z a t i o n

The o b j e c t i v e o f
the p r o j e c t
was
t o develop a t o o l s u i t a b l e for
investigating
alternative
dispositions
for
t h e use o f
the
water resource, t a k i n g i n t o account
conflicting
interests
such
as:
abstraction for
l o c a l and e x t e r n a l
p u b l i c water supply,
i r r i g a t i o n of
farmland,
recreational
use
of
s t r e a m s and
lakes,
use
of
the
s t r e a m s as r e c i p i e n t s
for treated
waste water.

Question 75:
I n the
p r e l iminary
project
i t was r e a l i z e d t h a t t h e
phase,
choice o f
a s i m u l a t i o n model t y p e
imp1 i e d
some
shortcomings.
Trade-offs could not be e x p l i c i t l y
d e t e r m i n e d and t h e model was n o t
able t o f i n d the "optimal"
scheme
for
a c e r t a i n c h o i c e o f l o c a l and
demands,
irrigation
e x t e r na 1
p e r m i s s i o n s , minimum d i s c h a r g e s a t
v a r i o u s s t a t i o n s and s e l e c t e d w a t e r
q u a l i t y standards e t c .
However, t h e
possibilities for obtaining detailed
information of the hydrological, the
water q u a l i t y ,
and t h e
economic
consequences
of
s e l e c t e d schemes
were f o u n d more i m p o r t a n t .

-149-

In
the
analysis
of
the
possibilities
of
developing
an
i t '&as
overall
o p t i m i z a t i o n model
r e a l i z e d t h a t o n l y a model w i t h a
hierarchical
structure
c o u l d be
u s e d . T h i s s t r u c t u r e was o u t l i n e d ,
b u t n o t worked o u t i n f u l l d e t a i l .

Question 76:
No f u r t h e r
constraints
imposed i n t h e p l a n n i n g phase.

were

Question 77:
The d e v e l o p e d s i m u l a t i o n model
consists of a series of hydrological
and w a t e r
q u a l i t y submodels w h i c h
aim t o p r o v i d e a u n i f i e d b a s i s f o r
water
r e s o u r c e s management.
The
sub-models c a n b e d i v i d e d
into a
hydrological
and a w a t e r
quality
model
complex,
supplemented w i t h
programs t h a t c a l c u l a t e t h e economic
consequences o f t h e chosen r e g i o n a l
w a t e r r e s o u r c e s scheme.
The m a i n h y d r o l o g i c a l
submodel
i s an i n t e g r a t e d s u r f a c e / s u b s u r f a c e
catchment m o d e l ,
which a l l o w s f o r
simulation of
s o i l moisture i n the
r o o t zone,
evaporation,
flow
in
tile-drains,
s t r e a m f l o w and seepage
t o and f l o w t h r o u g h a q u i f e r s .
This
model
i s e x t e n d e d w i t h models f o r
irrigation,
for
management
of
s u r f a c e r e s e r v o i r s and f o r l o w - f l o w
augmentation.
The model t h u s
takes
i n t o consideration the conjunctive
use o f
surface
and
groundwater
resources
with
the
intention of
providing water
f o r supply,
while
m a i n t a i n i n g adequate streamflows.

For
given
water
resources
dispositions
the
tota
mode 1
o p e r a t e s as s t a n d a r d d u r n g a t i m e
31
years,
utilizing
period of
m e t e o r o l o g i c a l d a t a f r o m he p e r i o d
1950-1980 on a d a i l y b a s i s a s i n p u t .
T h i s a l l o w s t h e consequences t o b e
evaluated
on
the basis o f
the
c l i m a t i c v a r i a t i o n s t o be expected
in the future.
Thereby a
also
of
the
statistical
assessment
consequences,
as
we1 1
as
a
p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e consequences as
functions
of
time
(for
example
c a n be
d u r i n g a drought period)
chosen.
The c o u p l i n g o f
t h e model
complexes i s shown i n F i g .
3.
As s t a n d a r d t h e model s i m u l a t e s
t h e h y d r a u l i c head o f
the primary
groundwater
in
112
locations,
c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e p o l y g o n s shown
i n Fig.
4,
t h e s t r e a m f l o w i n 45
stations
and
the
water
level
v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e l a k e s on a d a i l y
basis.
The w a t e r q u a l i t y i n t h e
lakes
i s c a l c u l a t e d as t h e y e a r l y p r i m a r y
production, while the q u a l i t y i n the
s t r e a m s i s g i v e n as t h e v a r i a t i o n o f
t h e oxygen c o n c e n t r a t i o n d u r i n g a
c r i t i c a l streamflow s i t u a t i o n i n the
above m e n t i o n e d 45 s t a t i o n s .
Add t o t h i s
a
series
of
for
sing1 ing
out
possibi 1 i t i e s
special
information,
for
example
regarding irrigation,
v a r i a t i o n of
the
i r r i g a t i o n demand, i n c r e a s e o f
the
evapotranspiration
and
the
percolation, etc.

Question 18:
The w a t e r q u a l i t y model complex
u t i l i z e s i n p u t s c o n c e r n i n g he w a s t e
( ocation,
water
t r e a t m e n t scheme
c a p a c i t y and r e m o v a l
e f f i c ency o f
the
treatment
f a c i l i t es
and
by-passing c o n f i g u r a t i o n s )
together
with
information
about c r i t i c a l
s t r e a m f l o w s and p o s s i b l e
low-flow
augmentations
simulated
by
the
h y d r o l o g i c model
complex.
This
allows for
s i m u l a t i o n o f the water
quality
i n streams.
Furthermore,
t h e w a t e r q u a l i t y complex c a l c u l a t e s
t h e l o a d o f n u t r i e n t s on two o f
the
lakes i n t h e basin,
by means o f
w h i c h t h e w a t e r q u a l i t y h e r e i n can
be determined.

The d i f f e r e n t
sub-models
were
tested,
c a l i b r a t e d and v e r i f i e d i n
connection w i t h various sub-projects
w i t h i n t h e e n t i r e Susaa p r o j e c t .
To
some e x t e n t t h e y w e r e m o d i f i e d when
introduced i n t o the t o t a l simulation
model.

Question 79:
The s e l e c t i o n o f a f i n a l
plan
f o r water
r e s o u r c e s development i n
t h e a r e a was o u t s i d e t h e scope o f
t h e r e s e a r c h programme.

o wz
w

0,
I - -

-150-

A
W

>
ul
w
-1

Y
U

I-

-1

0
W

I-

--

'
c.

P,

-151-

-P

0)

-152-

Question 20.
The
project
was
i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y o n l y i n t h e sense
that
both the quantity
and t h e
quality effects of
p o t e n t i a l water
r e s o u r c e s development
schgmes were
h a n d l e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y by t h e m o d e l ,
c o n t r a r y t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l approach
w i t h more o r
less
uncoordinated
planning o f water
a b s t r a c t i o n and
sewage d i s p o s a l , e t c .

5.
Planning
Stage
4:
Development
of
Final
Project
Specifications

The r e p o r t e d examples o f
s i m u l a t i o n (see 1) c o m p r i s e :

model

9~
Increase o f
surface
w i t h d r a w a l f o r e x t e r n a l use.

water

9~ C o n j u n c t i v e
a b s t r a c t i o n of
g r o u n d w a t e r and s u r f a c e w a t e r
for
e x p o r t purposes.

Question 27:
OR methods w e r e n o t u s e d i n t h e
i t i s possible
project.
However,
w i t h o u t any d i f f i c u l t i e s t o e x t e n d
t h e model b y a s u b - o p t i m i z a t i o n o f
the
waste
water
treatment
facilities.
With
given
quality
standards f o r
t h e s t r e a m and f i x e d
capacities
of
the
plants
the
t r e a t m e n t l e v e l s can be a l l o c a t e d i n
order
t o obtain
minimum
annual
c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n c o s t s .
Question 22:
No c o s t b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s
made as p a r t o f t h e p r o j e c t .

t h e model f o r p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e .
It
was t h e hope t h a t t h i s
illustrative
u s e o f t h e model w o u l d e n c o u r a g e t h e
water a u t h o r i t i e s concerned w i t h the
Susaa c a t c h m e n t
to
implement
the
model
in
the
future
planning
process,
as w e l l
as o t h e r w a t e r
authorities,
to
develop s i m i l a r
models.

was

9~ Groundwater
irrigation.

abstraction

for

Low f l o w a u g m e n t a t i o n .
Jt
A1ternative
t r e a t m e n t schemes.

waste

water

Essential for
selection
of
model s i m u l a t i o n examples was t h e
fact that
the c i t y of
Copenhagen
p r e v i o u s l y had shown g r e a t i n t e r e s t
i n t h e groundwater r e s o u r c e s o f
the
basin,
thereby competing w i t h l o c a l
demand f o r w a t e r s u p p l y ,
recreation
and i r r i g a t i o n .

Question 23:
Questions 24 and 25:
No s p e c i f i c r i s k a n a l y s i s was
performed,
but
i m p a c t a n a l y s i s was
performed t o a
l a r g e e x t e n t as a
substantial p a r t o f the project.
The p r a c t i c a l
use
of
the
i s shown i n F i g .
s i m u l a t i o n model
5. The d i s p o s i t i o n s o f t h e w a t e r
resource
to
be
analysed
are
s p e c i f i e d by t h e user
as
input t o
t h e model.
Depending on t h e needs
for
detailed
information of
the
consequences,
t h e user s p e c i f i e s t o
what e x t e n t
t h e simu a t e d r e s u l t s
s h o u l d appear
as o u PU t f rom t h e
model r u n n i n g .

The consequences o f
specific
p l a n s f o r use o f t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s
c a n be a s s e s s e d
in detail
by the
A
specific
simulation
model.
t r a d e - o f f a n a l y s i s was n o t
included
i n the p r o j e c t .
However, i t i s by
means o f t h e model p o s s i b l e t o s t u d y
the
environmental
and
economic
consequences o f v a r i o u s a l t e r n a t i v e s
f o r water r e s o u r c e s development
in
the
Susaa
catchment,
and
to
determine a p p r o p r i a t e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s
o f w a t e r w o r k s and sewage t r e a t m e n t
plants.

Question 26:
A s e r i e s o f poss b l e p l ann i ng
d i s p o s i t i o n s w e r e ana y s e d i n o r d e r
t o exemplify
t h e app i cab l i t y o f

No
decision-makers
were
involved i n the research p r o j e c t .

v)

U)

-153-

>

0 0

r o
o w
zv)
o z

2 3

IW

d o
a z

=U

0 3
0
v)

I-

a 0

n
v)

v)

-20

-154-

Questions 2 7 and 28:

No f i n a l p l a n was
p a r t of the project.

approved

as

Question 29:
The p r o j e c t g r o u p
made
on
t h e D a n i s h Committee o f
request of
Hydrology
a
proposal
for
a
g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of
system a n a l y s i s
models f o r w a t e r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g
purposes.
The Susaa p r o j e c t formed
an e s s e n t i a l b a s i s f o r t h e p r o p o s a l ,
w h i c h has n o t y e t been g r a n t e d .
t h e Susaa
A f t e r completion of
project
the
water
resources
management
group
was
asked t o
perform
a.
comprehensive
d o c u m e n t a t i o n and u p d a t i n g o f t h e
model i n o r d e r t o make i t p o s s i b l e
for
t h e r e g i o n a l water a u t h o r i t i e s
t o r u n t h e model.
Unfortunately
t h i s p r o j e c t was c o n f i n e d t o t h e

h y d r o l o g i c a l model
complex, so now
t h e more o p e r a t i o n a l v e r s i o n o f
the
model does n o t i n c l u d e w a t e r q u a l i t y
and economic a s p e c t s .
This project
was f i n a n c e d by t h e D a n i s h N a t i o n a l
of
Environment P r o t e c t i o n
Agency
together w i t h the three regional
w a t e r a u t h o r i t i e s o f Zealand.

6 . Planning Stage 5
Design

Project

Question 30:
No d e s i g n was p e r f o r m e d as p a r t
o f the p r o j e c t .

Reference
(1)
Knudsen
J.,
and
D.
Rosbjerg
(1982)
Water
resources
p l a n n i n g i n t h e Susaa b a s i n b y means
of
a
s i m u l a t i o n model.
Nordic
13, pp. 323-338.
Hydrology, Vol.

-155-

MANAGEMENT OF ISRAEL'S WATER RESOURCES

Uri SHAMIR
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technion,
Israel Institute of Technology,
Haifa, 32000, Israel.

1.

Introduction

I n t h i s c a s e s t u d y we c o n s i d e r
t h e u s e o f t h e systems a p p r o a c h f o r
p l a n n i n g and management o f
Israel's
water
resources.
I t i s somewhat
d i f f e r e n t f r o m o t h e r case s t u d i e s i n
t h i s volume,
because i t spans many
years o f
activity,
covering
a
continuous process o f plannings, i n
a water
resources p r o j e c t
which
c o v e r s an e n t i r e c o u n t r y , a l b e i t o n e
whose s i z e may n o t be much l a r g e r
t h a n some o f t h e r e g i o n s c o v e r e d b y
o t h e r case s t u d i e s .
A v e r y s u b s t a n t i a l amount o f
water
r e s o u r c e s systems a n a l y s i s
work has been c a r r i e d o u t i n
Israel
s i n c e t h e e a r l y 1 9 6 0 ' ~ ,s p a n n i n g t h e
entire
spectrum from l o n g range
p l a n n i n g f o r t h e e n t i r e c o u n t r y down
t o real-time
operation o f
local
systems.
A r e v i e w t o 1980 was
Herein
pub1 i s h e d b y Shamir (1980).
we s h a l l
answer
the questionnaire
w i t h s p e c i f i c reference
to
the
" P r o j e c t P 1 ann i ng" p a r t o f o u r work
Still,
this
r e f e r s n o t t o one
particular
study but t o planning
work f o r t h e n a t i o n a l system and i t s
r e g i o n a l components, work w h i c h has
been
done
i n many
inter-related
s t u d i e s over t h e years.

I s r a e l ' s water
resources a r e
managed b y t h e Water
Commissioner.
The
Hydrologic
Serv i c e
I S
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and
analysis,
and
a d v i s e s t h e Water
Commissioner.
Tahal-Water
Planning

for
Israel,
Ltd.
i s the national
Co.
Ltd.
planner.
M e k o r o t Water
is
t h e n a t i o n a l water
supplier.
Development, a d a p t a t i o n and use o f
systems
a n a l y s i s m e t h o d o l o g i e s and
m o d e l s have been c a r r i e d o u t b y
these bodies, i n close cooperation
with universities.
The s y s t e m s a n a l y s i s work
has
been s t r u c t u r e d as a h i e r a r c h y ( f o r
d e t a i 1 s see S h a m i r , 1980) :
at
the
top
are
models
of
long range
p l a n n i n g f o r t h e e n t i r e c o u n t r y , and
as one p r o g r e s s e s down t h e h i e r a r c h y
o f models t h e temporal
and s p a t i a l
detail
increases.
Some r e f e r e n c e s
a r e c i t e d a t t h e end o f
th.is case
s,tudy.
T h i s i s b u t a sample, s i n c e
an e x t e n s i v e l i s t w o u l d b e t o o l o n g .
A l s o , much o f t h e w o r k ,
even when
new
methodologies
were
being
d e v e l o p e d and t e s t e d ,
i s described
only
i n project reports,
most o f
them i n Hebrew.
Next
we
give
a
b r ie f
description
of
Israel's
water
r e s o u r c e s and
needs,
and
then
p r o c e e d t o answer t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .
I s r a e l ( F i g u r e 1) i s l o c a t e d i n
a s e m i - a r i d a r e a , where mean a n n u a l
p r e c i p i t a t i o n averages
25-50 mm i n
t h e s o u t h , 500-600 mm i n t h e c e n t r a l
r e g i o n s , and r e a c h e s 7 0 0 - l l O O mm i n
the north.
About 80% o f t h e t o t a l
p r e c i p i t a t i o n occurs i n the northern
h a l f o f t h e country, almost e n t i r e l y
b e t w e e n O c t o b e r and March.
The
country's
area
i s a b o u t 20,000

-156-

-157-

square
kilometers,
and
the
population i s j u s t over 4 m i l l i o n .
The
proven
natural
water
resources
of
Israel
amount
to
approximately
1850x10
m3/year:
a b o u t 60% i s f r o m g r o u n d w a t e r , 30%
i s f r o m Lake K i n n e r e t
( t h e Sea o f
G a l i l l e e ) , and t h e r e m a i n d e r i s f r o m
other s u r f a c e sources.
Two t h i r d s
o f t h e g r o u n d w a t e r comes from two
main a q u i f e r s :
the coastal aquifers
(a
5-30
km
strip
along
the
M e d i t e r r a n e a n c o a s t ) , and t h e d e e p e r
limestone
aquifer
to
its
east.
These m a i n s o u r c e s a r e shown on
Figure 1, together w i t h the National
Water C a r r i e r .
Completed
i n 1964,
t h e N a t i o n a l C a r r i e r i s t h e backbone
o f I s r a e l ' s w a t e r s u p p l y system.
I t
t a k e s a b o u t 400x10
rn3/year f r o m
Lake
K inneret,
and
through
connection
t o a b o u t 25 r e g i o n a l
systems s u p p l i e s and r e c e i v e s w a t e r
along i t s route.
Host o f t h e water p o t e n t i a l
is
already developed,
and i n c e r t a i n
cases--notably
the
coas t a 1
aquifer--is
over-exploited.
The
supply
t o t a l amount a v a i l a b l e fqr
depends o n t h e p o l i c y f o r e x t r a c t i o n
from t h e s o u r c e s :
should
i t be
balanced,
i .e.
n o t exceed t h e
natural
potential,
or
w i l l
over-draft
be
allowed f o r
some
p e r i o d o f time.
I f over-draft
is
allowed,
t h i s must e v e n t u a l l y l e a d
t o a reduction of
supplies,
unless
water
c a n be p r o d u c e d e c o n o m i c a l l y
from t h e r e m a i n i n g s o u r c e s a n d / o r b y
desalination.
Use
of
reclaimed
sewage f o r
irrigation of certain
c r o p s i s i n c r e a s i n g , and i s e x p e c t e d
t o r e a c h 250-300x10
m3/year.
Demand
present 1y
totals
1850x10
mg/year:
69%
in
agriculture,
22%
urban
and 9%
industrial.
75x10
m3/year
are
allowed t o f l o w f r o m the coastal
aquifer
t o t h e sea t o p r o v i d e some
f l u s h i n g o f c o n t a m i n a n t s and c o n t a i n
t h e sea w a t e r
intrusion.
This
brings
total
present
use
to
1925x10
mg/year,
more t h a n t h e
average
annual
potential
of
the
p r e s e n t l y developed sources.
U n t i l t h e l a t e 1960's t h e main
objective of
I s r a e l ' s water s e c t o r

was d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e s o u r c e s and
o f t h e c o n v e y a n c e and d i s t r i b u t i o n
systems,
t o b r i n g water
to all
consumers.
The
water
systems
d e v e l o p e d o v e r t h e f i r s t two decades
of
the S t a t e ' s existence from a
scattered
c o l l e c t i o n of outdated
l o c a l s y s t e m s , each based on i t s own
local
sources,
t o an
integrated
national
system.
Once t h e m a i n
systems w e r e i n p l a c e ,
and demands
reached
and
then
exceeded t h e
resource p o t e n t i a l , the water sector
has t o d e a l w i t h s c a r c i t y o f w a t e r
and c o m p e t i t i o n among t h e consumers.
The m a i n
i s s u e s and p r o b l e m s now
are:
(1) C o m p l e t i n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t
of
t h e remaining sources, which a r e
p r o b l e m a t i c , remote,
expensive,
of
low q u a l i t y .
These
i n c l u d e some
s u r f a c e and g r o u n d w a t e r , r e c l a i m e d
sewage and p o s s i b l y d e s a l i n a t i o n .
(2) The p r e s s u r e t o
increase
supplies,
o n t h e one hand, and t h e
responsibility
to
preserve
the
q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y o f w a t e r i n t h e
sources,
on t h e o t h e r ,
must
be
resolved
somehow
i n a balanced
pol icy.
(3) O p e r a t i o n o f
the National
Water
Carrier
and t h e r e g i o n a l
systems,
which connect t h e
main
r e s e r v o i r s and convey w a t e r o v e r
w t h the
considerable
distances,
a t t e n d a n t problems o f
re1 abi 1 i t y
and h i g h e n e r g y c o s t s .

(4) A n o t i c e a b l e d e t e r o r a t i o n
of water
quality
i n some o f t h e
sources, p r i m a r i l y
i n t h e coas t a 1
aqu i f e r .
which
(5) Limited
budgets,
severely constrain
investments
in
new
projects
and m a i n t e n a n c e o f
e x i s t i n g ones.

2. Planning Stage 1:
Project
Initiation and Preliminary Planning
Question I :
Long r a n g e p l a n n i n g
is
an
integral
component o f
t h e systems
a n a l y s i s work i t s e l f .
The models a t
t h i s level
consider
e x p l i c i t l y on
the
supply
side the stochastic

-158-

nature of
the
available
water
resources,
and o n t h e demand s i d e
The e x p e c t e d i n c r e a s e s
i n domestic
demands and t h e p r o d u c t i v e u s e s o f
w a t e r i n a g r i c u l t u r e and
industry.
The r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s i s a t t h i s
l e v e l p r o v i d e t h e framework f o r
all
of
t h e more d e t a i l e d r e g i o n a l and
p r o j e c t l e v e l plans.
is
The answer
t o Question 1
t h e r e f o r e t h a t when a p a r t i c u l a r
project
is
planned t h e r e
is a
it
l o n g - t e r m programme
i n t o which
must f i t .
A t
t h e same t i m e , t h i s
long-term
programme
I S
not
completely
fixed,
and
actually
evolves
and changes as r e g i o n a l
plans are studied.

Question 2:
For t h e
l a s t 20 y e a r s t h e r e
have a l w a y s been s e v e r a l teams o f
systems a n a l y s t s w o r k i n g o n v a r i o u s
components
of
the studies.
The
t o t a l number o f
s k i l l e d personnel
has r a n g e d b e t w e e n a b o u t 10 and 3 0 ,
i n 4-5 g r o u p s a t u n i v e r s i t i e s and
operational
agencies.
The p e o p l e ' s
expertise are:
water
resources
engineering,
mathemaics,
s t a t i s t i c s , computer s c i e n c e s .
Most
h o l d M a s t e r s and D o c t o r a t e d e g r e e s .
The
'pub1 i c '
is
always
represented
in
Israel
in
the
decision-making process,
by v i r t u e
of
the f a c t that representatives o f
several constituencies - notably the
the
f a r m e r s - s e r v e o n some o f
governing bodies.

Question 3
A t the highest
levels o f
the
systems
analysis
hierarchy
the
objectives
a r e r a t h e r g e n e r a l , and
a r e e x p r e s e d as ' t o s u p p l y a l l
the
water
needed
for
the country's
development
and w e l f a r e f o r
all
t i m e s t o come.'
As one moves down
t h e h i e r a r c h y t h e c r i t e r i a become
more
specific,
and
conflicting
objectives
appear.
Generally,
domestic
s u p p l y has t h e h i g h e s t
p r i o r i t y , and t h e r e m a i n d e r i s g i v e n
t o a g r i c u l t u r e and
industry.
The

primary c r i t e r i a f o r evaluation of
specific
plans
are:
meeting
demands,
preservation
of
water
q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y i n t h e s o u r c e s
f o r f u t u r e generations,
economics,
environmental q u a l i t y .

Question 4:
The s e v e r e s t c o n s t r a i n t s
are:
the
l i m i t e d water resource, budget,
t h e need t o s u p p l y w a t e r
according
t o the national settlement plan, the
( p o l i t i c a l ) d i f f i c u l t y t o reduce t h e
water a l l o c a t i o n t o a g r i c u l t u r e ( i n
o r d e r t o b a l a n c e t h e demand w i t h t h e
l i m i t e d supply,
as t h e
domestic
demands g r o w ) .
These c o n s r r a i n t s , a l l o f them,
have been and s t i l l a r e t h e s u b j e c t
o f d e b a t e s and c o n t r o v e r s i e s .
Even
t h e f i r s t , w h i c h seems t o depend on
n a t u r a l and
' o b j e c t i v e ' phenomena,
i s s u b j e c t t o d i s c u s s i o n because one
can a l l o w o v e r e x p l o i t a t i o n o f
the
aquifers
for
some t i m e a t t h e
' e x p e n s e ' o f f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s , and
therefor e
the
total
resource
constraint
i s actually a policy
variable.
The o t h e r c o n s t r a i n t s a r e
o b v i o u s l y p o l i c y d e c i s i o n s , and a r e
t h e r e f o r e open t o a g r e a t d e a l o f
d i s c u s s i o n , evqn i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a
p a r t i c u l a r r e g i o n a l s t u d y and n o t
only a t the national level.

Question 5:
I t i s v e r y h a r d t o answer
this
question
i n the c o n t e x t o f our
mu1 t i -year
mu1 t i - p r o j e c t
case.
Methods o f a n a l y s i s w e r e d e v e l o p e d ,
a d a p t e d and a p p l i e d i n v a r i o u s p a r t s
of
the work.
A t t i m e s t h e r e was
c o n s i d e r a b l e d i s a g r e e m e n t on w h i c h
method(s)
t o use,
b u t t h i s had i n
general a p o s i t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n
to
the
ultimate
outcome
of
the
A t
other
times
i t was
analysis.
q u i t e o b v i o u s w h i c h method w o u l d be
best

P r a c t i c a l l y a l l of
t h e known
approaches and
s y s tems
ana 1 y s i s
t e c h n i q u e s have been used,
i n one
case o r a n o t h e r .

-159-

3.
Planning Stage 2:
Data
Collection and Processing

Question 6
Many. d a t a b a s e s
have
been
developed over t h e years, y e t i t i s
recognized
that
considerable
u n c e r t a i n t y always remains.
Some o f
the
data
collection,
analysis,
assembly and p u b l i c a t i o n
deserve
s p e c i a l mention.
Hydrologic data o f
s u r f a c e w a t e r ( f l o w s , q u a l i t i e s ) and
of
groundwater ( l e v e l s , e x t r a c t i o n ,
q u a l i t y ) a r e c o l l e c t e d r e g u l a r l y on
an e x t e n s i v e s p a t i a l
and t e m p o r a l
grid.
These d a t a a r e p u b l i s h e d and
made a v a i l a b l e t o a l l p l a n n e r s .
An
o f f i c i a l 'Water Resources P o t e n t i a l
Book'
i s u p d a t e d once e v e r y
few
is a
years,
and,
once p u b l i s h e d ,
formal
b i n d i n g document
for
all
plans.
While i t i s recognized t h a t
t h i s document d o e s n o t c o n s t t u t e
the u l t i m a t e f i n a l ' t r u t h ' , i t puts
work
by
order
i n a1 1 p l a n n i n g
e s t a b l i s h i n g an o f f i c i a l g u i d e 1 ne.
On
the
demand
side
the
situation
i s different.
Exact data
e x i s t o n p a s t and p r e s e n t demands
( m o n t h l y and a n n u a l q u a n t i t i e s f o r
all
consumers)
since
water
is
allocated,
metered
and c h a r g e d .
Forecasts of
f u t u r e demands,
in
particular for
new s e t t l e m e n t s and
t h e i n c r e a s e i n d o m e s t i c use,
are
open t o e s t i m a t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n by
planners,
even t h o u g h some b i n d i n g
n a t i o n a l documents do e x i s t .
A
source o f
uncertainty
in
planning i s the estimated budget
t h a t w i l l be a v a i l a b l e t o t h e w a t e r
sector
i n general
and
to
each
project
i n p a r t i c u l a r , i n t h e years
t o come.
I n r e c e n t years
this
u n c e r t a i n t y has been a c a u s e f o r
in
the
considerable
difficulty
planning
phase,
more
so,
for
example, t h a n any e x p e c t e d changes
i n cost data, i n t e r e s t rates, e t c .
A l s o n e t b e n e f i t from water used f o r
i r r i g a t i o n i s an i m p o r t a n t p i e c e o f
information
for
planning.
Data
e x i s t f r o m a number o f s o u r c e s ,
but
there are considerable differences
between v a l u e g i v e n by t h e v a r i o u s
sources
( d e p e n d i n g on t h e i r v e s t e d
i n t e r e s t i n t h i s m a t t e r ) so t h a t
no
f i r m data are available.

Question 7:
Data i s c o n s t a n t l y
collected,
analyzed
and
assembled
by the
Hydrologic
Service,
Tahal
and
Mekorot on:
hydrology of surface
and
ground
waters,
actua 1
consumptions,
expected
demands,
irrigation.
costs,
b e n e f i t s from
Still,
for
each p l a n f o r m u l a t i o n
some a d d i t i o n a l
d a t a a s s e m b l y and
I S
performed.
anal ys i s
data
Occasionally,
synthet ic
g e n e r a t i o n i s a l s o used.

Question 8:
OR t e c h n i q u e s have been u s e d b y
t h e H y d r o l o g i c S e r v i c e t o p l a n and
operate
the
data
collection
networks, p r i m a r i l y of groundwater.

Question 9:
Assessment o f d a t a a v a i l a b i l i t y
i s performed on a r e g u l a r b a s i s by
the
agencies
in
charge,
and
t h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s u s u a l l y no need
t o deal w i t h t h i s m a t t e r e x p l i c i t l y
i n the context of
a
particular
planning study.

Question 70:
Data a n a l y s i s , u s i n g a v a r i e t y
of
statistical
methods, i s c a r r i e d
o u t on a r e g u l a r
b a s i s by
the
H y d r o l o g i c S e r v i c e and T a h a l , f o r
the
surface
and
ground
water
hydrology data.
4.
Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation and Screening of
Project Alternatives

Question 11:
A
typical
regional
planning
1 and 2
study
r e q u i r e s between
man-years o f
systems a n a l y s t s and
supporting s t a f f .
Additional costs
are p r i m a r i l y f o r several
hours o f
computation
time
on
a
large
computer.

Question 12:
Not r e evant, s i n c e t h e s t u d i e s
a r e c a r r i e d o u t by t h e
institutions
themselves.

-160-

Question 13:
No p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e
normal
sense, e x c e p t t h a t m e n t i o n e d
already i n Question 2.

projects
an
ad-hoc
steering
c o m m i t t e e i s u s u a l l y s e t up.
I t
is
the f i r s t level o f plan evaluation,
b u t i t s o u t p u t m u s t t h e n go t o t h e
permanent c o m m i t t e e s , and u l t i m a t e l y
t o t h e Water Commissioner h i m s e l f .

Question 14:
The a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e u s u a l l y
in
a
mathematical
d e f i ned
programming
model
by a s e t of
constraints.
T h e r e f o r e t h e r e i s an
f eas i b 1 e
infinite
number
of
Still,
the
a1 t e r n a t i v e s .
c o n s t r a i n t s determine t h e range o f
feasible alternatives,
and s e t t i n g
t h e c o n t r a i n t s amounts t o s c r e e n i n g
o u t some a l t e r n a t i v e s . The systems
analysts formulate the constraints,
and m u s t t h e r e f o r e be c a r e f u l n o t t o
impose t h e i r own f i x e d i d e a s on t h e
plan.
I n a t y p i c a l model t h e r e i s a
v e r y l a r g e number
(hundreds,
even
several
thousands)
of constraints,
and some a r e r a t h e r i n t r i c a t e .
The
c h a n c e t h a t anyone b u t t h e systems
analysts
themselves
will
detect
misconceptions
and/or e r r o r s i n t h e
c o n s t r a i n t s i s v e r y low. T h i s
puts
a
great
responsibility
on t h e
must
systems a n a l y s t s ,
and t h e y
e x e r c i se
a
great
deal
of
self-discipline
and p e r s e v e r a n c e i n
checking
and
r e - c h e c k i ng
the
cons t r a i n t s

M a t h e m a t i c a l programming models
can
determ i ne
the
s i zes
of
components
which are present
in
t h e i r f o r m u l a t i o n - i f allowed they
can
zero
out
values,
thereby
d e l e t i n g p r o p o s e d components - b u t
t h e y c a n n o t ' i n v e n t ' new components
w h e r e such w e r e n o t i n c l u d e d b y t h e
analyst i n formulating
t h e model.
Thus model f o r m u l a t i o n does c o n t a i n
some a l t e r n a t i v e s e l e c t i o n .
The
a n a l y s t m u s t t h e r e f o r e be c a r e f u l t o
include
i n t h e model a l l r e a s o n a b l e
alternatives,
and n o t s c r e e n out
a r b i t r a r i l y such a l t e r n a t i v e s .

Question 75:
Decisions
in Israel's
water
sector
are
made
by t h e Water
Commissioner.
He
has
appointed
several
committees t o a i d him i n
t h i s m a t t e r , so t h a t each p l a n must
pass
t h r o u g h an e l a b o r a t e c h e c k i n g
and a p p r o v a l p r o c e s s .
For i m p o r t a n t

Trade-offs
are
somet imes
expressed e x p l i c i t l y
( i n t h e model
i t s e l f o r i n the e v a l u a t i o n process)
and sometimes i m p l i c i t l y .
Conflict
i s by d i s c u s s i o n s
in
resolution
c o m m i t t e e s , u l t i m a t e l y b y t h e Water
Commissioner
himself,
aided
by
r e s u l t s of the analysis.

Question 16
A f u l l answer t o t h i s q u e s t i o n
w o u l d c o v e r much more space t h a n i s
allowed here.
We s h a l l
try
to
answer
i n general, f o r the various
types
of
constraints
normally
present i n our p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s .
(a)
H y d r o 1 ogy and
ava i 1 ab 1 e
water:
These a r e r a t h e r w e l l f i x e d .
Some s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s i s u s u a l l y
performed,
t o explore the e f f e c t o f
u n c e r t a i n t y i n o u r knowledge o f
the
sources
and
of
the stochastic
hydrology.
(b) Demands:
Some a r e imposed
by t h e n a t i o n a l development p l a n s
f o r settlement.
Forecasts o f
urban
demand g r o w t h a r e open t o d i s c u s s i o n
and
analysis
by
the planners.
A g r i c u l t u r a l demands a l m o s t a l w a y s
exceed a v a i l a b l e r e s o u r c e s , s o t h a t
little
difficulty
exists
in
a s s e s s i ng them.
(c) Economics:
The b u d g e t a r y
c o n s t r a i n t m u s t b e d e a l t w i t h by
it
parametric investigation,
since
i s u s u a l l y unknown i n advance.
The
same h o l d s
true for
the interest
rate.

Question 17:
Many models h a v e been used o v e r
(LP,
DP)
t h e years:
optimization
and
simulation
(deterministic,
stochastic).
For p l a n n i n g p u r p o s e s ,
t h e TEKUMA model
(Schwart e t a l . ,
1981a.b.
1982)
has
become
the
standard t o o l .
I t i s a package o f
i nc 1 udes
the
programs
which
f o l l o w i n g components:

-161-

(a) A m a t r i x g e n e r a t o r .
Given the
b a s i c d a t a , i t 'expands' i t i n t o
t h e f u l l c o e f f i c i e n t m a t r i x and
i t o u t an MPSX
input
writes
f i le.
(b) S o l u t i o n o f t h e LP by M P S X .
(c) A
report
generator.
G i ven
it
s p e c i f i c a t i o n s by t h e user
w r i t e s out the tables o f the
output
in a
convenient
and
u s e f u l form.
The L P
following:

model

considers

the

t i m e p e r i o d s over
(a) A number o f
the planning horizon
(e.g.
5
y e a r s , 10 y e a r s )

(b)

Each p e r i o d i s r e p r e s e n t e d b y
y e a r , d i v i d e d i n t o seasons.

(c)

c o n d i t i ons
Sever a 1 h y d r o 1 o g i c
are
considered,
each
representing a d i f f e r e n t level
o f water
a v a i l a b i l i t y a t the
sources
(e.g.
dry,
average,
wet)

Question 78:
The models w h i c h have been u s e d
i n t h e p a s t , and t h e TEKUMA model as
w e l l , a r e always s u b j e c t t o a
long
and
detai led
t e s t i ng
and
v e r i f i c a t i o n process.
We r e p e a t h e r e a comment made
earlier.
The systems a n a l y s t s have
an o n e r o u s
responsibility
t o make
certain
that
before
any f i n a l
r e s u l t s a r e g e n e r a t e d w i t h a model
it
i s f r e e of
logical
and d a t a
errors.
If
t h i s i s n o t done e a r l y
enough i n t h e s t u d y t h e n more l i k e l y
t h a n n o t such e r r o r s w i l l
become
apparent
later,
as r e s u l t s a r e
for
the
final
plan
studied
formulation,
c a s t i n g doubt on t h e
e n t i r e s t u d y and
rendering
the
modelling e f f o r t useless.

Question 19:

(d) Two
types
of
water
(e.g.
potable,
non-potable)
are
identified.
Sources and l i n k s
( p i p e s , c h a n n e l s ) b e l o n g t o one
or
the other
type.
Consumers
may t o l e r a t e up t o a
given
percent o f e i ther type i n t h e i r
supply.
(e) Over-year
storage.

and

within-year

See
answers
questions.

to

previous

Question 20:
Disciplines participating
in
i nc 1 ude:
planning
s t u d i es
and
i r r i g a t i on,
agr ic u l t u r e
agricultural
economics,
hydrology,
hydraulic
engineering,
water
and
sewage
treatment,
eng i neer i ng
economics.

5.
Planning
Stage
Development
of
Final
Project Specifications

4:

Question 21:
(f)

Lower bounds o n demands m u s t be

met.
Consumers may b e a b l e t o
p u r c h a s e more, d e p e n d i n g o n t h e
cost of
the water d e l i v e r e d t o
them and t h e b e n e f i t t h e y can
derive from using i t .
v a r i ab1 es
are:
in
each
capacity
expansion
annua 1
and seasona 1
p e r i od,
o p e r a t i o n i n t h e t y p i c a l year o f
each p e r i o d , o f t h e s o u r c e s and
1 inks.

(9) D e c i s i o n

T h i s model has been d e v e l o p e d

a t Tahal
over
t h e p a s t y e a r s , and
has been u s e d t o s t u d y t h e e n t i r e
n a t i o n a l s y s t e m and s e v e r a l r e g i o n a l
plans.

See Q u e s t i o n 1 7 .

Question 22:
C o s t - b e n e f i t a n a l y s i s has been
employed i n s p e c i f i c d e s i g n s t u d i e s .
I n planning studies the objective i s
usually
t o minimize cost, since the
l e v e l o f s u p p l y and o f
service
is
imposed

Question 23:
Explicit
risk
or
impact
analyses a r e n o t performed usual-ly.

References
Question 24:
M u l t i - o b j e c t i v e methods
have
been t r i e d ( A l k a n and S h a m i r , 1 9 8 0 ) ,
used
on a r o u t i n e b a s i s .
More
o f t e n , s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s i s used
t o explore
t h e t r a d e - o f f s between
objectives

A l k a n , D . , and Shamir,
U.
(1980).
"Multiple
objective planning of
a
regional
water
resources
439-465
in
sys tern",
pp.
O p e r a t i o n s Research i n A g r i c u l t u r e and W a t e r R e s o u r c e s , Ed. by
C.
Tapiero,
D.Yaron
and
N o r t h - H o l l a n d P u b l i s h i n g Co.

Question 25:
See above.

Question 26:
O p t i m a l s o l u t i o n s g e n e r a t e d by
models a r e u s e d t o f o r m u l a t e f i n a l
p l a n s , which a r e t h e n approved v i a
t h e process discussed
i n Question

Question 27:
See Q u e s t i o n

15.

Question 28:
Projects are a l l
funded from
t h e n a t i o n a l budget a l l o c a t e d t o t h e
water
sector,
e x c e p t some
local
in
whose
funding
the
projects
consumers p a r t i c i p a t e .

Questions 29:

Schwarz,
J.,
et
al.
(1981).
"Framework
plan for
Israel's
water
sector''.
Progress r e p o r t
no.
11:
Formulation of
the
for
the national
TEKUMA model
plan'',
R e p o r t No.
01/81/51
(in
Hebrew), T a h a l - Water
Planning
for Israel Ltd.
Schwarz,
J.,
et
al.
(1981).
" S o u t h e r n Arava - F o r m u l a t i o n o f
t h e TEKUMA model model
for
a
master
plan".
Report
No.
0 1 / 8 1 / 2 4 ( i n Hebrew),
Tahal
Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e l L t d .

No e x p l i c i t s t u d y has
been
carried out
t o evaluate a specific
a p l a n n i n g process.
The
part of
goes
on
almost
analysi s
continuously,
and p a s t p l a n s a r e
c o n s t a n t l y under
re-evaluation
and
modification.

6. Planning Stage 5:
Design

Gablinger,
M.,
Schwarz,
J.,
and
Y.
(1972).
"Use
of
Yardi,
systems
approach
in
planning
Israel I s
water
resources
management".
International
Symposium
on Water
Resources
P l a n n i n g , Mexi Co.

J.,
et
al.
(1982)
Schwarz,
"Framework
plan for
Israel's
water
sector".
Progress r e p o r t
no.
12:
Extreme s c e n a r i o s
for
d e v e l o p m e n t t o t h e end o f t h e
century
(analysis
with
the
TEKUMA
mode 1) ' I ,
Report
No.
01/82/11 ( i n Hebrew),
Tahal Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e l L t d .

Project

Question 30:
D e t a i l e d d e s i g n and d r a w i n g s
a r e prepared by o t h e r departments o f
Tahal.
There i s a c l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n
b e t w e e n t h e s y s t e m s a n a l y s t s and t h e
designers.

Schwarz,
J.,
et
al.
(1981).
Report
"TEKUMA u s e r ' s manua 1 ' I .
No.
01/81/50 ( i n Hebrew), Tahal
- Water P l a n n i n g f o r I s r a e l L t d .
Schwarz, J . , Meidad, N.
and Shamir
U.
(1 985)
"Water
qual it y
management i n r e g i n a l
systems".
341-349 i n S c i e n t i f i c B a s i s
pp.
f o r Water Resources management,
IAHS P u b l i c a t i o n No. 153, Ed. by
M. D i s k i n .
(1980).
"Application of
Shamir, U .
operations research i n
Israel's
water s e c t o r " .
European J o u r n a l
o f O p e r a t i o n a l Research, V o l . 5 ,
PP. 3 3 4 - 3 3 4 5 .

-163-

PROMOTION OF MULTIPURPOSE WATER MANAGEMENT

FACILITIES IN THE TIRNAVA MARE BASIN

P. STEGAROIU, I DIMA, R. AMAFTIESEI, V.VISAN

Research and Design Institute
for Water Resources Engineering, ICPGA,
Spl. lndependentei 294
C.P. 7895 Bucharest, Romania

1.

Introduction

Multipurpose
river
bas i n
a t both flood
development,aiming
control
and t h e r a t i o n a l
use o f
water resources, p l a y s a s i g n i f i c a n t
role for
t h e economic and s o c i a l
d e v e l o p m e n t o f Romania.
Thus, s i n c e t h e ' 5 0 s when t h e
f i r s t n a t i o n a l f i v e years p l a n s were
in
full
progress,
an i n c r e a s i n g
a t t e n t i o n was g i v e n t o t h e w a t e r
problem,
starting
with
the
development
of
the
hydropower
potential.
L a t e r , t h e comprehensive w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s management schemes w e r e
studied;
during
1959 - 1962, t h e
mu1 t i p u r p o s e
water
resources
d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s f o r each r i v e r
b a s i n and f o r t h e w h o l e c o u n t r y Water M a s t e r P l a n - were p r e p a r e d .
The n e c e s s a r y
methodological
procedures concerning the o u t l i n e o f
r i v e r b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s and
the guidelines f o r
solving
the
imp1 i e d
technical
and
economic
problems
were p r e p a r e d w i t h i n a
close cooperation o f
the
involved
interdisciplinary specialists.
Water M a s t e r P l a n s e r v e d as a
v a l u a b l e base o f
subsequent
five
years
p l a n s f o r water
resources
development.

A
systematic
activity
I S
implemented
within
the
water
r e s o u r c e s management p l a n n i n g f i e l d
c o n s i s t i n g o f p e r i o d i c a l adapting of
l o n g - t e r m f o r e c a s t s and o f f r a m e w o r k
r i v e r b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t schemes i n
connection w i t h the social-economic
development f i v e y e a r s p l a n s .
This a c t i v i t y , as w e l l
as t h e
project/design
planning a c t i v i t y ,
r e p r e s e n t s an a p p r o p r i a t e f r a m e w o r k
to
implement
and
develop
the
methodological
tools
including the
system a n a l y s i s
techniques
as
a
maj o r
component.
The
above-mentioned t e c h n i q u e s a r e a l s o
a p p l i e d when p r e p a r i n g and u p d a t i n g
long-term reservoir operation r u l e s
as w e l l as f o r s u p p o r t i n g o p e r a t i o n
d e c i s i o n s of water resources system
i n t h e day-by-day a c t i v i t y .
Following
the
catastrophic
floods
of
1970,
w h i c h damaged
c e r t a i n areas i n the country,
and
based on t h e m e n t i o n e d Water M a s t e r
Plan,
there
was
initiated
the
Mu 1 t i p u r p o s e
Comprehensive
Development P l a n , f o r t h e Upper Mures
r i v e r basin,
t h e so c a l l e d "Mures
Project".
T h i s p r o j e c t examined t h e
general
framework
of
regional
development
and t h e r e l a t e d w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s management p r o b l e m s .
The
problems,

wide
both

variety
technical

of
the
ones

-164-

hydrology,
hydrogeology,
geology,
h y d r o e n g i n e e r i n g , w a t e r management,
- and t h o s e
land
reclamation
concerning
economic,demographic,
h o u s i n g and s o c i a l a s p e c t s , r e q u i r e d
the
participation
of
Romanian
personnel
from
many
specialized
governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s
i n the
country.
An
i m p o r t a n t s u p p o r t was
UNDP,
consisting
of
from
the
technical
assistance
by
highly
qual i f i e d
U.N.
experts
and
fellowship
training
programmes
granted t o
Romanian
specialists
i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o j e c t development.
The d e v e l o p m e n t
of
t h e Mures
P r o j e c t gave a good o p p o r t u n i t y t o
update,
e x t e n d and
improve
the
m e t h o d o l o g i c a l t o o l s used f o r r i v e r
b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p r o b l e m s and f o r
t h e promotion o f water
resources
management s y s t e m s .
T i r n a v a Mare,
as a s u b b a s i n
within
the
Upper Mures
basin
was
also
analyzed
for
a
m u l t i p u r p o s e development, t h e m a j o r
and
more
u r g e n t problems b e i n g
regional
planning,
p o p u l a t i o n and
economic
objectives
protection
against
floods,
and
low
flow
augmentation
to
permit
water
provision for
population, industry
and i r r i g a t i o n .
The s t u d i e s
concerning
the
f e a s i b i l i t y a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r f ood
p r o t e c t i o n consisted mainly of:

ana 1 y s e s
of
f
hydrological
p a r a m e t e r s under
var
actual conditions
and f o r
assumed
possibi 1 it i e s
rainfall-runoff
occurrence
distribution;

ood
the
ous
of
and

survey o f
experienced
flood
of
damage
and
determ in a t ion
p o t e n t i a l f l o o d damages;

- economic f e a s i b i l i t y a n a l y s e s
for the selection o f
flood
control
scheme.
Within
the
adopted
water
resources
development
scheme,
s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r s p l a y t h e most
significant
role,
an
important
levels
r e d u c t i o n o f maximum f l o w

along the r i v e r being thus achieved.

Embankment w o r k s ,
upon t h e w a t e r s
c o n t r o l l e d by r e s e r v o i r s f l o o d f l o w ,
were a d o p t e d o n l y i n l i m i t e d zones,
namely t o p r o t e c t human s e t t l e m e n t s .
The p e r f o r m e d a n a l y s e s showed a
h i g h e f f e c t i v e n e s s f o r t h e proposed
flood control
facilities,
as t h e
e x p e c t e d a n n u a l a v e r a g e damage w i l l
decrease t o
l e s s t h a n 4% o f
its
value i n the pre-existing s i t u a t i o n .
Bes i d e s t h e
h y d r o e n g i neer i ng
works
for
flood
control,
i.e.
embankment
works,
river
bed
r e g u l a t i o n and d e t e n t i o n / t e m p o r a r y
reservoirs
the
r iver
bas i n
i nc 1 uded
development
scheme
mu1t i purpose r e s e r v o i r s
a1 so
with
conservation
storage
capac i t y
for
1 ow
f lor
augmentation i n d r y p e r i o d s .

Now, a f t e r t e n y e a r s f r o m t h e
Upper Mures P r o j e c t s t a r t p e r i o d ,
most
of
the
hydroengineering
s t r u c t u r e s i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare r i v e r
b a s i n a r e a l r e a d y under o p e r a t i o n o r
i n an advanced s t a g e o f c o m p l e t i o n .
The

planning
process
for
water
management
facilities
i n T i r n a v a Mare r i v e r
basin
is
illustrated
in
the
following,
a c c o r d i n g t o t h e adopted
questionaire.

mu 1 t i p u r p o s e

2. Planning Stage 1:
lnitiatation
and
Prel irninary Planning

Project

Question 1
I n Romania, t h e framework o f
a
planned development i n t h e f i e l d o f
w a t e r has been i n i t i a l l y d e f i n e d by
a
Decree
i s s u e d i n 1953 r e g a r d i n g
t h e r a t i o n a l u t i l i z a t i o n , management
and p r o t e c t i o n o f w a t e r
resources.
The Decree s t i p u l a t e d t h e p r o m o t i o n
o f a m u l t i p u r p o s e w a t e r management
and t h e c o n d i t i o n s imposed f o r a l l
t h e water r e l a t e d w o r k .
On t h e b a s i s o f
t h e mentioned
Decree,
t h e r e have been e l a b o r a t e d
the f i r s t r i v e r basins multipurpose
w a t e r management p l a n s and i n 1962

t h e long term water resources development p l a n f o r t h e w h o l e c o u n t r y

L a t e r on, f o r c e r t a i n a r e a s , as
required,
the
water
resources
development
schemes
have
been
updated.
The p r o m o t i o n o f m u l t i p u r p o s e
w a t e r management i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare
r iver
bas i n
observed
the
above-mentioned g e n e r a l l i n e .
The s o l u t i o n s
for
protection
a g a i n s t t h e f l o o d s and,
for
users'
water
s u p p l y h a v e been e s t a b l i s h e d
w i t h i n an
integrated
long
term
a n a l ys i s .
Thus, u s i n g our own e x p e r i e n c e
of
water
in
the
elaboration
r e s o u r c e s d e v e l o p m e n t p l a n s and w i t h
the assistance of U.N.
- U.N.D.P.,
during
1972-1975
t h e r e has been
prepared
a
comprehensive
m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y development p l a n
f o r t h e Upper Mures r i v e r b a s i n , t h e
s o - c a l l e d "Mures
Project".
This
p l a n was a p r o g r e s s f r o m t h e p o i n t
o f view o f
conception
of
the
r e g i ona 1
planning
e 1 emen t s
consideration,
within
the r i v e r
b a s i n s development,
as
well
as
r e g a r d i n g t h e methods t h a t h a v e been
used o r d e v e l o p e d .
The n e c e s s i t y o f
integrating
water r e l a t e d works
in a unitary
c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e complex management
and compehensive and r a t i o n a l u s e o f
water resources i s u n d e r l i n e d i n t h e
Water
Act
(Law) a d o p t e d i n Romania
i n 1974.
T h i s Law s t a t e s
(in art.
4)
t h e e l a b o r a t i o n o f a framework
scheme f o r r i v e r b a s i n s d e v e l o p m e n t ,
as w e l l
as
(in art.
30)
that
documents
for
the
p r o j ec t
hydroengineering s t r u c t u r e s , or
for
water
r e l a t e d works,
should take
i n t o account t h e s t i p u l a t i o n s of t h e
framework w a t e r r e l a t e d d e v e l o p m e n t
schemes.
The same Law s t a t e s
(in art.
36)
that for
hydroengineering or
water
related
p r o j e c t documents
t h e r e m u s t b e o b t a i n e d t h e agreement
o f w a t e r management a u t h o r i t y .
The
Law a l s o s t a t e s ( i n a r t .
37) t h a t
b y t h e agreement o f w a t e r management

authority,
t h e water
users
are
o b l i g e d t o a c h i e v e t h e w o r k s and t o
t a k e n e c e s s a r y measures i n o r d e r
to
a v o i d d i s t u r b i n g o t h e r u s e s and t o
p r e v e n t damages i n t h e a r e a .
The framework w a t e r
resources
development
schemes, r e v i e w e d e v e r y
5 y e a r s , and t h e e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e
water
management
agreement
for
hydroengineering
s t r u c t u r e s and f o r
any o t h e r w a t e r
related objective,
c o n s t i t u t e premises f o r s o l v i n g t h e
i m m e d i a t e as we1
as t h e f u t u r e
w a t e r management p r o b l e m s
in
a
r a t i o n a l manner
n accordance w i t h
their
importance f o r
t h e general
development o f t h e c o u n t r y .

Question 2
The c o o r d i n a t i o n o f
activities
for
t h e development o f t h e r e q u i r e d
studies
i n different
stages
and
p r o j e c t documents,
as w e l l as t h e
promotion
of
water
related
development
facilities
has b e e n
accompl i shed
by
the
Permanent
E x e c u t i v e Body o f
t h e Upper Mures
Project.
The e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e c o m p l e x
water
r e s o u r c e s management scheme
and
the
necessary
methodology
improvement have been a c h i e v e d b y
t h e R e s e a r c h and D e s i g n I n s t i t u t e
f o r Water
Resources
Engineering
( I CPGA)

The w i d e v a r i e t y o f
problems,
both technical
ones - h y d r o l o g i c ,
hydrogeology,
geo 1 o g y ,
h y d r o e n g i n e e r i n g , w a t e r management,
land
reclamation
and
those
concerning
economic,
demographic,
h o u s i n g and s o c i a l a s p e c t s , r e q u i r e d
the
participation
of
Romani a n
personnel
from
many s p e c i a l i z e d
governmental o r g a n i z a t i o n s .
An i m p o r t a n t s u p p o r t was from
t h e UNDP c o n s i s t i n g o f
technical
assistance by h i g h l y q u a l i f i e d U.N.
e x p e r t s and f e l l o w s h i p s
training
programmes
granted
to
Romanian
specialists
involved i n the p r o j e c t
development.

Mures

Since t h e beginning of
P r o j e c t and t h r o u g h o u t

the
the

-166-

p r e p a r a t i o n o f p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s and
p r o j e c t documents,
for
the
main
hydroengineering
structures,
the
1 oca 1
authorities
have
been
consulted.
These
supported
the
p r i o r i t y of solving flood protection
for
human
settlements
and
the
economic o b j e c t i v e s ,
as w e l l as i n
t h e p r o v i s i o n o f supplementary f l o w s
f o r p o p u l a t i o n and i n d u s t r i a l u s e r s .

Question 3
The Mures P r o j e c t
and
the
promotion
of
water
resources
management f a c i l i t i e s i n t h e T i r n a v a
Mare r i v e r b a s i n , as p a r t o f
this
project,
have
been
intiated
f o l l o w i n g the
line of integrating
t h e w a t e r management a c t i v i t y i n t h e
s o c i a l - e c o n o m i c development o f
the
c o u n t r y (see Q u e s t i o n 1 ) .
A t t h e same t i m e , t h e d e c i s i o n
regarding
the
initiation of
the
p r o j e c t has been d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e
f 1 oods
of
1970
which
caused
i m p o r t a n t damages t o t h e p o p u l a t e d
centres
and
to
the
econom i c
o b j e c t i v e s i n t h e area.

Question 4
I n g e n e r a l , t h e r e have n o t b e e n
restrictive
constraints
maj o r
a f f e c t i n g t h e development o f
the
project.
As a r e s t r i c t i v e c o n s t r a i n t ,
imposed b y t h e l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s d u e
t o some p o t e n t i a l damaged l o c a l i t i e s
i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare m a j o r r i v e r bed,
t h e r e s h o u l d be m e n t i o n e d t h e u r g e n t
requirement t o
increase by
local
works
t h e degree
of
protection
against
floods
i n the p r i n c i p a l
human s e t t l e m e n t s .
The d i m e n s i o n o f
those
local
works
had
to
be
conceived t o ensure, together w i t h
the e f f e c t of
considered
flood
control
storage
capacities,
the
r e q u i r e d degree o f s e c u r i t y .
The a c h i e v e m e n t o f l o c a l w o r k s
( r i v e r beds t r a i n i n g ,
embankment,
and o t h e r s ) r e p r e s e n t s a t r a n s i t i o n
s o l u t i o n achieving t o a great extent
t h e aim
of
protection
against
floods.

The p r o b l e m has been s o l v e d

through
cooperation
among
specialists,
local
a u t h o r i t i e s and
t h e decision-makers.
Thus, i n some
a r e a s where t h e m i n o r r i v e r bed had
become v e r y n a r r o w as a r e s u l t o f
urban
development
i n the
past
a
severe
systematization
area
was
of
the
bui 1t
necessary.
Some o f
t h e embankment
and
r i v e r bed r e g u l a t i o n w o r k s have been
c o m p l e t e d i n 1974 - 1975.
Now by t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f
the
principal
f l o o d c o n t r o l s t o r a g e and
d e t e n t i o n p o o l s , p r o p e r degrees o f
security against
f l o o d s have been
a v o i ded

Question 5
The e x i s t i n g m e t h o d o l o g y
for
t h e Water
Master
Plan,
for
the
framework w a t e r r e a t e d development
schemes and f o r t h e p l a n n i n g o f
the
w a t e r managements s stem s e r v e d as a
s t a r t i n g p o i n t and t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
o f p o s s i b e improvements d u r i n g t h e
project
development
has
been
dec i ded

The
necessary
improvements
r e f e r m a i n l y t o t h e e x t e n s i o n and
the
r e f i nement
of
mathematical
models f o r
f l o o d occurrence,
to
estimations,
and
hydraul ic
e s t i m a t i o n s o f w a t e r management from
a q u a n t i t a t i v e and w a t e r q u a l i t y
p o i n t o f view.

3.

Planning Stage 2:
Data
Gathering and Processing
Question 6

W i t h i n t h e p r o j e c t t h e r e have
been used b e s i d e s h y d r o l o g i c a l d a t a ,
f ' l ood
damages,
data
r e g a r d i ng
demographical
data,
and
elements
r e g a r d i n g t h e economic development
of
t h e a r e a and r e g a r d i n g w a t e r
requirements.
These
data
are
d i s c u s s e d w i t h Q u e s t i o n 7.

Question 7
Analysis of f l o o d

hydrological

-167-

parameters
was p e r f o r m e d
i n two
ways:
first,
by processing
the
observed
avai l a b l e
data
(a
20
continuous observation period o f
y e a r s supplemented w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n
on t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t
historical
f l o o d e v e n t from a p e r i o d o f o v e r
100
years),
and
second,
by
mathematical modeling o f r a i n f a l l runoff
process,
for
r e1evant
scenarios
regarding the r a i n f a l l
d i s t r i b u t i o n i n various river basin
areas.

damages
experienced
during
the
floods of
May
1970 when o n t h e
T i r n a v a Mare t h e r e w e r e r e c o r d e d
maximum
levels
close
to
1%
occurrence p r o b a b i l i t y .

The f l o o d h y d r o g r a p h s and t h e
peak
flows,
r e s p e c t i v e l y maximum
l e v e l s , were t h u s o b t a i n e d f o r
the
f l o w r e g i m e and s e r v e d as
natural
base i n p u t d a t a i n t h e f e a s i b i l i t y
analysis of
the structural
flood
control alternatives.

Based o n t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f
the
1970 f l o o d damages and o n p o t e n t i a l
damages,
gathered
by
inquiry
e s t i m a t i o n s , f o r two f l o o d l e v e l s o f
5% and
0.5
- 0.1% o c c u r r e n c e
p r o a b i l i t y , t h e "maximurn
level/peak
f l o w - f l o o d damage" r e l a t i o n s h i p s
were d e t e r m i n e d .

As w a t e r r e s o u r c e s d a t a t h e r e
have been used a s e r i e s o f a v e r a g e
monthly f l o w s f o r
t h e p e r i o d 1950
-1970
considered as f i t t e d f o r t h e
estimation
of
water
management
balance r e g a r d i n g t h e water uses.

For t h e s y n t h e t i c g e n e r a t i o n o f
h y d r o l o g i c a l d a t a (as a v e r a g e a n n u a l
f l o w s and a v e r a g e m o n t h l y f l o w s ,
w i t h and w i t h o u t
consideration of
self-correlation)
e x i s t i n g models
have been a d o p t e d f r o m
relevant
publications
and were e l a b o r a t e d
i n t o computer programmes.
The l o w
degree
of
regularization of
the
examined s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r s d i d n o t
r e q u i r e t h e use o f s y n t h e t i c f l o w
g e n e r a t i o n models f o r
the
water
management e s t i m a t i o n s .
The d a t a r e g a r d i n g w a t e r
needs
for
i r r i g a t i o n h a v e been d e t e r m i n e d
for
t h e p e r i o d 1950
-1970,
as
average monthly values u s i n g t h e
potential
e v a p o t r a n s p i r a t i o n method
and t h e s o i l w a t e r
balance.
A
m a t h e m a t i c a l model f o r t h e s y n t h e t i c
g e n e r a t i o n o f i r r i g a t i o n w a t e r need
values on t h e b a s i s o f
temperature
and r a i n f a l l s d a t a has been t r i e d ,
b u t t h e r e s u l t s have
not
been
satisfactory.
The a n a l y s i s o f f l o o d damage
s t a r t e d w i t h t h e survey o f f l o o d

The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
damages
along
t h e r i v e r showed a m a j o r
c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n urban centres,
the
maximum
weights
belonging
to
industrial
units
(64% o f
total
losses)
and f o r
s u b s t r u c t u r e s and
r e s i d e n c e s (34% o f t o t a l ) .

The "damage
probabi 1 i t y "
functions
could
be o b t a i n e d b y
combining t h e " f l o w
- damage" and
occurrence
the
"maximum
flow
r e 1 a t i onsh i p s ;
probabi 1 i t y "
furthermore
the
annual
average
p o t e n t i a l damages were d e t e r m i n e d i n
the
major
areas
for
the
given/existing
s i t u a t i o n s and f o r
t h e f u t u r e development
pattern of
t h e areas, tak.ing i n t o account t h e
economic
g r o w t h and d i s c o u n t i n g t h e
damage v a 1 ues

Question 8
The d a t a c o l l e c t i o n
methods
have been e s t a b l i s h e d o n t h e b a s i s
of
e n g i n e e r i n g analyses.
As
the
study p e r i o d for t h e average monthly
f l o w s , t h e r e has been t a k e n t h e 1950
-1970 p e r i o d w i t h more r e l i a b l e d a t a
and w i t h a s u f f i c i e n t l e n g t h f o r t h e
q u a n t i t a t i v e water resources - water
demand b a l a n c e .

Question 9
The e s t i m a t i o n o f t h e a v a i l a b l e
d a t a has b e e n made on t h e b a s i s o f
the
analyses
performed
by t h e
s p e c i a l i s t s and p r e s e n t e d w i t h i n a
p 3 n e l o r g a n i z e d b y t h e Permanent
E x e c u t i v e Body o f t h e p r o j e c t , w i t h
experts.
the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f U.N.

-1.08-

Question 10
Among o t h e r s , i n t h e a n a l y s e s
regarding
the
registered
flood
hydrographs
i n the subbasin, t h e r e
has been used t h e s i m u l a t i o n model
and
of
flood
waves
r o u t i ng
c o m p o s i t i o n , namely UNDA / l / , a l s o
used a f t e r w a r d s i n t h e e s t i m a t i o n o f
the
flood
control
scheme
alternatives.

4.
Planning
Stage
3:
Formulation and Screening of Project
AI ternat ives

Question 1 1
Roughly,
for
the formulation
and s c r e e n i n g o f w a t e r management
alternatives
i n t h e T i r n a v a Mare
R i v e r b a s i n t h e r e have b e e n used
a b o u t 60 man-months and 300 h o u r s o f
computer f a c i l i t i e s ( I B H 360 and I C L

structures
in
cons i d e r e d
alternatives
o f t h e water resources
development scheme.
The a l t e r n a t i v e s were p r o p o s e d
by
technicians/experts
and
established
through
discussions
o r g a n i z e d b y t h e Permanent E x e c u t i v e
- P.E.B.
- witll
the
Body
UN - UNDP e x p e r t s
participation of
w i t h i n consulting missions.

Question 75:
The h i e r a r c h i c a l
structure of
the
decision-making
p r o c e s s has
r e s u l t e d f r o m t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and
development p a t t e r n o f t h e p r o j e c t ,
as m e n t i o n e d i n Q u e s t i o n 2 .
The p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e a 1 t e r natives
was made b y spec a1 i z e d
i n s t i t u t e s and b y t h e P.E.B
with
t h e a s s i s t a n c e o f UN e x p e r t s .

1905)
Question 12
The p r o m o t i o n o f m u l t i p u r p o s e
water
r e s o u r c e s development i n t h e
T i r n a v a Mare R i v e r B a s i n , as w e l l a s
t h e w h o l e Mures p r o j e c t ,
has been
s u p p o r t e d b y t h e Romanian Government
w i t h e q u i p m e n t , f i n a n c i a l means and
computer
facilities
(see Q u e s t i o n
2)

Question 13
As was m e n t i o n e d i n Q u e s t i o n 2 ,
s i n c e t h e i n i t i a t i o n and a l o n g w i t h
the
planning
activity
for
the
p r i nc i p a 1
h y d r o e n g i n e e r i ng
s t r u c t u r e s t h e r e has been p e r m a n e n t
cooperation
with
the
1 oca 1
a u t h o r i t i es
and
other
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the p u b l i c i n t h e
area.

Question 14
T h e r e have been examined
7
major
groups o f
alternatives for
m u l t i p u r p o s e w a t e r management and a
l o t o f s u b a l t e r n a t i v e s determined by
of
socio-economic
hypotheses
deve 1 opment ,
hydrological
data
(flood occurrence patterns) ,
and
parameters
of
the
techn ica 1

o p t i ons
The t e c h n i ca 1
have
been t a k e n
by
the
p r e l m i nary
approval o f
proposed s o l u t ons a t
involved m i n i s t r i e s i n agric 1ture,
water,
forestry
and
regional
p l a n n i n g problems.
The f i n a l d e c i s i o n was t a k e n a t
governmental
level
t h a t approved,
f o r each h y d r o e n g i n e e r i n g
structure
(but t a k i n g i n t o account the general
framework, t h e t e c h n i c a l s o l u t i o n s ) ,
t h e f i n a n c i n g and m a t e r i a l s means
and n e c e s s a r y manpower.
The t r a d e - o f f a s p e c t s have been
t r e a t e d by
qualitative
implicit
estimations.
Thus, f o r some s t o r a g e
reservoirs
the requirements o f the
dam's
construction
and
those
concerning
the
storage/reservoir
area d i d n o t f i t ,
such t h a t t h e
examination o f l o c a t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s
was
imposed.
There
have
been
preferred
locations
with
more
d i f f i c u l t conditions for
t h e dam's
c o n s t r u c t i o n s b u t more f a v o u r a b l e
ones f o r t h e s t o r a g e a r e a .

Question 16:
There
are
not
addi t i onal
mentions o t h e r t h a n those o f Q u e s t i o n

4.

-109-

Question 17:
The d e v e l o p m e n t o f
t h e Mures
P r o j e c t gave a good o p p o r t u n i t y t o
update,
e x t e n d and
improve
the
methodological
t o o l s used f o r r i v e r
b a s i n d e v e l o p m e n t p r o b l e m s and f o r
t h e p r o m o t i o n of water
resources
management s y s t e m s .

m a t hema t i ca 1
models,
The
largely applied w i t h i n the project,
were t h o s e o f
q u a n t i t a t i v e water
management ( f o r
flood control
and
f o r t h e w a t e r management b a l a n c e ) .
The UNDA m a t h e m a t i c
simlJlation
model and t h e a s s o c i a t e d computer
programme
/ 1/ ,
based
on
the
numer i ca 1
integration
of
the
Saint-Venant
e q u a t i o n system,
was
a p p l i e d a l o n g t h e whole development
of
the
p r o j e c t t o perform the
a n a l y s e s o f t h e h y d r a u l i c and f l o o d
con t r o 1
parameters
(reservoi r
r o u t i n g , f l o o d waves c o m p o s i t i o n and
channel r o u t i n g ) .
This
model,
prepared
and
a p p l i e d i n Romania p r e v i o u s l y , has
been r e f i n e d
during
the
Mures
Project.
As t h e UNDA s i m u l a t i o n model
r e q u i r e s as
i n p u t data a s e t o f
characteristic
parameters
representing
in
fact
unknown
quantities
of
t h e problem,
the
to
be
number
of
a 1 t e r n a t i ves
examined was
too high.
Moreover,
d u e t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e UNDA model
being
rather
sophisticated,
is
computer t i m e consuming, o u t o f
the
numerous p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s , o n l y
a few ones were s e l e c t e d f o r s u c h a
detailed analysis.
The P r e l i m i n a r y
screening
of
alternatives
was
a c h i e v e d m o s t l y based on h e u r i s t i c
ana 1 yses
and
approximative/expeditious
procedures.
The s i m p l i f i e d s i m u l a t i o n model
PRAT was d e v e l o p e d i n t h i s
respect,
based o n l e s s a c c u r a t e c o m p u t a t i o n
procedures,
but
o f f er i ng
high
e f f i c i e n c y as w e l l a s r a p i d i t y .
model
This
through
routing

performs
flood
reservoirs,
or

c h a n n e l s and f l o o d waves c o m p o s i t i o n
as w e l l .
Computation
procedures
u s e d w i t h i n t h e s i m p l i f i e d model a r e
for
reservoir
the
Puls
method
routing
and
Musk i ngum
and
Kalinin-Miliukov
methods f o r r i v e r
bed r o u t i n g / 8 , 1 8 / .
The p o s s i b l e c o n j u n c t i v e u s e o f
UNDA and PRAT m o d e l s
is to
be
mentioned.
As
t h e input d a t a f o r
t h e UNDA model
implies
important
t e c h n i c a l and f i n a n c i a l e f f o r t ,
the
PRAT model i s used t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e
s e l e c t i o n o f zones f o r m o r e d e t a i l e d
analyses.
On t h e o t h e r hand, when
that
t h e UNDA model c a n be a p p l i e d ,
i s v e r y u s e f u l even i n p r e l i m i n a r y
studies t o help the calibration of
the
PRAT
model
parameters,
an
important increase of
PRAT r e s u l t s
accuracy b e i n g obtained.
Therefore,
it
is
more
efficient
to
do
preliminary
screening
for
the
s e l e c t i o n o f t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s t o be
d e t a i l e d b y UNDA model,
a higher
o p e r a t i v i t y i n s o l v i n g t h e problem
and a n i m p o r t a n t s a v i n g o f computer
t i m e and f u n d s b e i n g a c h i e v e d .
I n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e use o f
t h e m e n t i o n e d s i m u l a t i o n models a
p r o g r e s s was a c h i e v e d
i n preparing
r a i n f a l l - r u n o f f models/ 5 , 2 3 / .

B e s i d e s t h e PRAT
simplified
simulation
model,
for
the
preliminary screening o f
structural
alternatives
(and t h e r e f o r e f o r t h e
system parameters
selection),
a
preoptimization
mode 1
was
e x p e r i m e n t e d on,
based
on
the
1 inear
programming
separable
a 1 g o r i thm /8/.

T h i s model aims t o f i n d o u t t h e
most f a v o u r a b l e Combinations o f
the
local
f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n works i n t h e
damaged zones and s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r
waves
flood
for
capac i t y
alleviation.

The a n a l y s i s
i s performed on
t h e maximum f l o w i n each z o n e t o b e
protected,
without
taking
into
account t h e e x p l i c i t behaviour
of
t h e system by t i m e i n t e r v a l s w i t h i n
t h e f l o o d wave.

-170-

I n p u t d a t a f o r t h e model a r e :

- cost functions (investment

c o s t p r e s e n t v a l u e p l u s t h e sum o f
annual
expenditures converted
to
present values) f o r local p r o t e c t i o n
i n each zone t o
be
protected,
d e p e n d i n g on t h e maximum f l o w i n t h e
r e s p e c t i v e zone:
-

cost
functions
(investment
c o s t p r e s e n t v a l u e p l u s t h e sum o f
expenditures converted
to
annua 1
for
f 1 ood
waves
p r e s e n t v a 1 ues)
a1 l e v i a i o n b y r e s e r v o i r s , d e p e n d i n g
i n the
on max mum f l o w r e d u c t i o n
reservo r s i t e :

influence of
coefficients,
express ng t h e r e d u c t i o n e f f e c t o f
s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r o n t h e maximum
f l o w i n each zone t o b e p r o t e c t e d :

maximum f l o w v a l u e s
i n each
to
be protected,
for
the
zone
occurrence p r o b a b i l i t y corresponding
to
the
required
protection
level/degree.
The model
results
are
the
maximum
flow
reduction
in the
reservoir
s i t e s and t h e m o d i f i e d
maximum f l o w v a l u e s i n each zone t o
be
protected,
m i n i m i z i ng
the
effort
in
storage
econom i c
r e s e r v o i r s and
i n local protection
works.
For
the
water
management
b a l a n c e t h e r e have been u s e d m o s t l y
existing
mathematic
s imu 1 a t i o n
models e x a m i n i n g i n m o n t h l y v a l u e s
t h e b e h a v i o u r o f w a t e r management
systems u p t o g e t t i n g t h e d e s i r e d
parameters
( t h e achievement o f t h e
necessary degrees f o r m e e t i n g w a t e r
needs f o r d i f f e r e n t
categories o f
users).

K i n d l e r w i t h i n the V i s t u l a p r o j e c t
for
the
use
of
(1 969- 197 1 )
O u t - o f - K i l t e r network a l g o r i t h m / l 5 ,
16, 28/, d o e s p e r m i t , f o r example:

- t h e e x p l i c i t a n a l y s i s of
water
flow
within
the
river
b a s i n / w a t e r management system:
- t a k i n g i n t o account t h e water
q u a l i t y p r o t e c t i o n requirements,
as
a
dilution
flow
condition,
downstream t h e r e t u r n f r o m t h e w a t e r
users :
- consideration, within
the
a
total
storage
capacity,
of
variable
conservative
capacity
during
the
year
months,
in
complementarity
with
the
flood
p r o t e c t i o n one;

- computation t h e factual
degree/probability
o f meeting t h e
water
management
r e q u i rements,
e x p r e s s e d a s f r e q u e n c y , as d u r a t i o n
and as q u a n t i t y (volume) as w e l l .
T h i s model
river
basins
Romani a .

i s now a p p l i e d i n 6
or
subbasins
in

W i t h i n t h e p r o j e c t t h e r e have
been
prepared
a l s o mathematical
models f o r w a t e r q u a l i t y problems:
one o f
them
i s a s i m u l a t i o n model
for
thermic
pollution,
w h i c h was
a p p l i e d a f t e r some r e f i n e m e n t s ,
Question 18:

A l l t h o s e m e n t i o n e d models were
tested w i t h i n the p r o j e c t .

As
r e l a t e d t o the study of
t e c h n i c a l parameters of m u l t i p u r p o s e
water
management
systems,
the
- o p t i m i z a t i o n model
simulation
SIMOPT / 1 1 /
and
the
associated
computer programme w e r e d e v e l o p e d .

The
calibration
and
v e r i f i c a t i o n , as a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r
an e f f i c i e n t use o f t h e models i n
t h e s t u d i e d p r o b l e m , needed
i n the
c a s e o f t h e UNDA model d e t a i l e d d a t a
concerning
t h e t o p o g r a p h y and t h e
n a t u r e o f r i v e r beds ( i n c l u d i n g l o n g
and c r o s s p r o f i l e s ,
and r o u g h n e s s ,
and
data
regarding t h e recorded
f l o o d hydrographs.

The SIMOPT m o d e l ,
representing
an i m p r o v e d and e x t e n d e d a d a p t a t i o n
of p r e v i o u s procedures developed by
A.
F i l i p k o v s k i and J .
Ian King,

improved
The UNDA model was
w i t h i n t h e Mures P r o j e c t ,
and t h e
achievement
of
t h e SIMOPT model
needed a d a p t a t i o n s and e x t e n s i o n s o f

-171-

other
similar
models,
aspects
mentioned w i t h i n Q u e s t i o n 17.

Question 19:
The
final
s o l u t ion
was
e s t a b l i s h e d and approved f o r
each'
hydroengineering
structure taking
i n t o account i t s a r t i c u l a t i o n w i t h
t h e framework p l a n .
The p a r t i c i p a t i o n and t h e r o l e
of
the
technical
experts,
the
d , e c i s i o n - m a k e r s and t h e pub1 i c were
shown w i t h i n Q u e s t i o n 15.

Question 20:
By
i t s nature,
the
project
needed a t i g h t c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n
the experts o f
several
fields:
hydrology,
hydroengineering,
demography,
hous i ng ,
r e g i ona 1
p l a n n i n g , w a t e r management.
The n e c e s s a r y s t r u c t u r e
has
been p r o v i d e d b y t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n
i n t h e p r o j e c t o f t h e Water Resouces
Management I n s t i t u t e - I C P G A - and
of other
i n s t i t u t e s related t o the
g i v e n problem.
The c o o p e r a t i o n
within
the
project
showed t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f an
interdisciplinary
terminology
as
well
as t h e m a j o r r o l e o f
the
workshops
i n order
t o c l a r i f y and
approach t h e
p o s i t i ons
of
the
participants involved i n the project
development.

5.
Planning Stage 4:
Development
of Final Project Specifications
Question 21.

As a b a s e
i n the elaboration
and
the
improvement
of
the
m a t h e m a t i c a l models one may m e n t i o n
as more
i m p o r t a n t t h e b o o k s and
papers/23, 2 5 , 2 9 / f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l
/15,
25,
28/
as c o n c e r n s
and
quantitative
water
management
balance computation.
The t e c h n i c a l
literature
was
mos t
used
included
following:

that
the

CHIRIAC, V . , e t a l .
- Lacuri
de a c u m u l a r e
(Storage r e s e r v o i r s ) ,
Edit.
CERES,
Bucuresti,
Romania,

1976.
DIACONU, C . ,
et al.
- Some
p o s s i b i l i t i e s for reconstructing the
data
corresponding
to
natural
hydrological conditions
- Casebook
of
computation
of
on
methods
quantitative
changes
in
the
hydrological
regime o f r i v e r b a s i n s
due t o human a c t i v i t y .
P r o j e c t 5.1.
- I.H.P., Unesco, 1980.
TEODORESCU, I . ,
et
al.
Gospodarirea Apelor.
(Water
Ed i t u r a
CERES,
Management) ,
Bucuresti,
Romania,
1973.
MAAS, A .
- D e s i g n o f Water
Resources
Systems.
Ha r v a r d
U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , Cambridge, 1962

The u s e o f m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l s
for
final
project specifications
and 50
needed a b o u t 20 man-months
hours e l e c t r o n i c computer t i m e ( I B M
360 and I C L 1 9 0 5 ) .
Due t o
i t s performances,
the
model
i s r e c o g n i z e d as
the
model w i t h t h e l a r g e s t a p p l i c a t i o n
i n t h e development o f p a r a m e t e r s f o r
f l o o d c o n t r o l systems.

UNDA

The f i n a l s o l u t i o n p a r a m e t e r s
were
determined using s i m u l a t i o n
models, i . e .
t h e UNDA model
for
f l o o d c o n t r o l a s p e c t s and f a c i l i t i e s
and t h e w a t e r management b a l a n c e
models f o r t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e s t o r a g e
capacity of
reservoirs
for
the
consuming w a t e r u s e r s .
The e x i s t i n g models,
prepared
i n Romania b e f o r e t h e Mures P r o j e c t ,
have
been
improved
during the
p r o j e c t , as shown w i t h i n Q u e s t i o n

17.

The w a t e r
resources - water
needs b a l a n c e s i m u l a t i o n m o d e l s a r e
a l s o used, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e examined
problem,
but f o r water
resources
management p r o b l e m s as r e g a r d s t h e
meeting o f users' water
needs,
the
SIMOPT
model
is
largely applied
because o f t h e m u l t i p l e a s p e c t s t h a t
c a n be a c c o u n t e d f o r and due t o t h e
high
effectiveness
of
the

o p t i m i z a t i o n a l g o r i t h m used
t h e computer programme.

within

Question 22:
The
investments
recovery
d u r a t i o n , t h e b e n e f i t - c o s t r a t i o and
the
internal
rate of
r e t u r n were
u s e d as s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a f o r f l o o d
c o n t r o l a l t e r n a t i v e comparison.

A l l t h e mentioned c r i t e r i a use,
as b a s e , t h e b e n e f i t v a l u e s
t o be
o b t a i n e d by a c h i e v i n g t h e proposed
flood control
measures
and
the
structural facilites.
Recognizing the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n
the
estimation
of
direct
and
secondary
flood
damages,
multi-criteria
analysis
is
very
including
sensitivity
usef u1 ,
range v a l u e s o f
a
analysis for a
series of
p a r a m e t e r s and f a c t o r s
such
as
the
discount
rate,
hypotheses on t h e r a t e o f
economic
development
i n t h e zone,
and t h e
s t u d y p e r i o d f o r w h i c h t h e economic
e f f i c i e n c y a n a l y s i s i s performed.

Question 23:

or

We d i d n o t make any p r o p e r r i s k
impact a n a l y s i s .

For t h e c h o s e n f l o o d s
control
s o l u t i o n t h e r e were d e t e r m i n e d t h e
maximum f l o w s
(levels)
in
the
natural
r e g i m e and i n t h e d e v e l o p e d
r e g i m e ( m o d i f i e d b y works)
for
the
e x c e e d i n g p r o b a b i l i t y o f 5%, 1% and
O,l%.

The t r a d e - o f f
aspects
m e n t i o n e d a t Q u e s t i o n 15.

We
did
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
ana 1 y s i s .

not

were

make
any
optimization

The
participation
of
the
decision-makers
was p r e s e n t e d a t
Q u e s t i o n 2 and Q u e s t i o n 15.
The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
and
the
development p a t t e r n o f t h e p r o j e c t
c o n s t i t u t e d a p r o p e r framework and a
favourable
premise
in
preparing
alternatives
and
for
the
decision-making process.
The m u t u a l
u n d e r s t a n d i n g and
t h e c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n e x p e r t s and
decision-makers
may h e l p d e f i n i t e l y
t h e development o f
the
planning
water
process
of
mu1 t i p u r p o s e
r e s o u r c e s management.

Question 25:
Explicit
trade-off
analyses
were n o t made.
One had
i n view
measures and w a s t e w a t e r t r e a t m e n t
f a c i l i t i e s o f r e t u r n flows from the
users,
and t h e i r c o s t s i n o r d e r t o
p r o v i d e the r e q u i r e d water
quality
p a r a m e t e r s were e v a l u a t e d .
The minimum a c c e p t a b l e f l o w , i n
river
bed
downstream
multiplepurpose storage, c o u l d be p r o v i d e d
by t h e t r a n s f e r o f
the required
amount
of
water
for
t h e users
l o c a t e d downstream.

Question 26:
As c o n c e r n s t h e r i v e r b a s i n
development
impact,
i n order
to
prevent undesired side e f f e c t s , the
a minimum a c c e p t a b l e
provision of
flow,
downstream o f
the storage
dams, was
taken
i n t o account
and
s o i l e r o s i o n p r e v e n t i o n measures and
w o r k s i n t h e s t o r a g e w a t e r s h e d s were
proposed.

Question 24:
The f i n a l s o l u t i o n was chosen
on
t h e e l e m e n t s and i n f o r m a t i o n
g i v e n b y t h e a n a l y s i s made a c c o r d i n g
t o questions 21 - 23.

The u t i l i s e d m o d e l s h e l p e d t o
prepare the a l t e r n a t i v e solutions of
r i v e r b a s i n development.
The f i n a l
solution
was e s t a b l i s h e d b y t h e
decision-makers'
and
the
technicians/experts,
taking
also
into
account
some
add i t i ona 1
information.
T h i s was b e c a u s e t h e
model
i n p u t d a t a ( w a t e r needs, and
of
potential
flood
evaluation
damages among o t h e r s ) a r e a f f e c t e d
by u n c e r t a i n t y .

Questions 27 and 2 8
As shown
i n Q u e s t i o n 15 t h e
Permanent E x e c u t i v e Body o r g a n i z e d
t h e p r e p a r a t i o n and t h e d e c i s i o n s
through
the
j u s t i f i c a t i on
in s t itutes,
and
specialized
presented
the
solution
t o the
i nvo 1 ved
ministries
and
for
government
approval
for
each
structure
separately,
but taking
i n t o account i t s a r t i c u l a t i o n t o t h e
framework p l a n .
The n e c e s s a r y i n v e s t m e n t f u n d s ,
m a t e r i a l s and manpower were
insured
b y t h e a p p r o v a l o f each s o l u t i o n .

Question 29:
The a n a l y s e s o f m u l t i p u r p o s e
w a t e r management i n t h e T i r n a v a H a r e
r i v e r b a s i n as w e l l
as
i n other
r i v e r b a s i n s were made i n 1980 when
deve 1 opmen t
the
river
bas i n
framework schemes were u p - t o - d a t e .
I n t h e T i r n a v a Hare r i v e r b a s i n
t h e r e w e r e no p r o b l e m s o f w a t e r
shortages o r
f l o o d damages, i n t h e
zones where t h e w a t e r management
f a c i l i t i e s were c o m p l e t e d .
The p e r i o d i c a l
update o f
the
framework schemes a s s o c i a t e d t o w i t h
the
f ive-year
plans
and
the
e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e p r o j e c t documents
c o n s t i t u t e s a f a v o u r a b l e framework
for
the
introduction
of
methodological
improvement - when
p r o m o t i n g t h e new m u l t i p u r p s e w a t e r
management f a c i l i t i e s - a d a p t e d t o
t h e d i f f e r e n t s p e c i f i c cases.
D u r i n g t h e most r e c e n t y e a r s ,
within
several
research
works
regarding
the
water
resources
development p l a n s
i n the Tirnava
Mare r i v e r s u b b a s i n , s u p p l e m e n t a r y
a n a l y s e s were made c o n c e r n i n g some
i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n aspects,
such as,
f o r example, t h e f o l l o w i n g :
a.
management

Q u a n t it a t i v e
water

water
qual it y

protection.
The n e c e s s a r y d i l u t i o n f l o w s
w i t h i n t h e r i v e r beds t o meet t h e
required
water q u a l i t y standards
according t o e x i s t i n g regulations
were c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e
starting
point.

The a n a l y s i s was
focussed on
t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e above-mentioned
d i l u t i o n f l o w s upon t h e r e s e r v o i r s
o p e r a t i n g regime
(behaviour)
and
upon t h e a c t u a l d e g r e e s o f m e e t i n g
q u a n t i t a t i v e w a t e r demands.
The demands o b t a i n e d i n t h i s
way
s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r p e r f o r m i n g
comparative
analyses
of
water
quality
control
alternatives for
e a c h c o n s i d e r e d zone e . g :
waste
water t r e a t m e n t a t upstream water
u s e r s , d e c r e a s e o f raw w a s t e l o a d i n
r e t u r n waters by
intervention
in
technologies
at
upstream
water
users,
water
treatment a t analysed
the
water users,
and
i n c r e a s e of
d i l u t i o n f l o w s w i t h i n t h e r i v e r beds
by
an
appropriate
reservoirs
o p e r a t i n g system.

b.
Improvement o f w a t e r - e n e r g y
t r a d e - o f f i n a t h e r m o power p l a n t
An a n a l y s i s was p e r f o r m e d o n
the possi b i 1 i t y of
d e c r e a s i ng t h e
r e c y c l e d amount o f w a t e r w i t h i n
a
c o o l i n g c i r c u i t by
increasing the
installed capacity of
the
water
s u p p l y system,
taking i n t o account
t h e r i v e r f l o w r e g i m e v a r i a t i o n as
modif ied
by
the
new
proposed
reservoirs.
The r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d
in this
way
s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r e x a m i n i n g
the
economic
opportuni t y
of
promoting t h e modernizing o f
the
w o r k s o f w a t e r s u p p l y system, t a k i n g
i n t o account t h e necessary c o s t s
in
the
considered
modernizing
a l t e r n a t i v e v e r s u s t h e energy saved
i n recycling the cooling water.

6.
Planning Stage
Project Design

5:

Question 30:
The d e s i g n documents
(project
have
been
achieved by
d e s i gn)
s p e c i a l i z e d groups o f
the
same
i n s t i t u t e - ICPGA - involved i n t h e
elaboration of
the
river
basin
development
scheme and i n s u r n g t h e
d e v e l o p m e n t o f s t a g e s 1 - 4.

-174-

The c o n n e c t i o n
between
the
m u 1 t i p u r pose
water
management
experts
and
hydrotechnicians
e n g i n e e r i ng)
experts
(hydraul ic
became
permanent,
when t h e two
groups
were
establ i shi ng
the
functional
elements o f the designed
structural facilities.
Thus,
r e l a t e d elements
(e.g.
t h e w a t e r i n t a k e and t h e s p i l l w a y
and o u t l e t
facilities
of
storage
reservoirs)
had t o b e c o n c e i v e d so
t h a t t h e c o u l d take i n t o account the
operation rules, t o provide the for
achievement
of
w a t e r management
parameters adopted t o j u s t i f y
the
promotion o f the p r o j e c t .
System a n a l y s e s t e c h n i q u e s and
p r o c e d u r e s a r e a p p l i e d nowadays on
an i n c r e a s i n g s c a l e w i t h i n
ICPGA
(The R e s e a r c h and D e s i g n I n s t i t u t e
f o r Water R e s o u r c e s E n g i n e e r i n g ) and
other
agencies ( i n s t i t u t e s ) r e l a t e d
t o w a t e r f i e l d a c t i v i t y , as w e l l
as
within
the
local
r i v e r basins
a u t h o r i t i e s when p r o m o t i n g t h e w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s systems and e s t a b l i s h i n g
their
long-term
and
real-time
operation rules.
Thus, t h e f o l l o w i n g
techniques
a r e used i n t h e p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t y t o
establish
the design parameters o f
t h e w a t e r r e s o u r c e system:

- t h e B l C A D computing programs
package
( D u l c u 1978)
i s used t o
c r e a t e , m a i n t a i n , u p d a t e and o p e r a t e
the
data
base
of
water
use
inventory;
it
i s a p p l i e d nowadays
w i t h i n four of
the total
of
nine
r i v e r basins:
- t h e more s o p h i s t i c a t e d UNDA
model
(Amaftiesei 1976), a p p l i e d i n
the basins,
and
the
almost a l l
faster, simplified
model,
PRAT,
applied
i n 20% o f t h e r i v e r b a s i n s ,
a r e used f o r f l o o d c o n t r o l a n a l y s e s ;
- t h e s i m u l a t i o n GRINGO, HOMBRE
and
ART I ZAN
(Amaf t i e s e i
1984)
to
compute w a t e r
models,
used
r e s o u r c e s - w a t e r demands b a l a n c e , a r e
applied
i n many r i v e r b a s i n s
in
accordance w i t h t h e k i n d o f
the
a n a l y z e d scheme;

- the simulation-optimization
SIMOPT model (Dima, V i s a n 1980) used
i n any k i n d o f scheme c o n f i g u r a t i o n
i n order t o analyze t h e multipurpose
is
water
resources
systems
implemented
i n seven b a s i n s
and
subbasins
and w i l l b e p r o g r e s s i v e l y
also applied f o r a l l the other r i v e r
bas i ns.
Concerning
the
problem
of
storage r e s e r v o i r s
and r i v e r bed
s e d i m e n t a t i o n as w e l l as t h e w a t e r
r e g i me
i n c l u d i ng
qual i t y
e u t r o p h i c a t i o n , t h e r e were d e v e l o p e d
or
are
b e i n g experimented w i t h
mathematical
s i m u l a t i o n models
in
order
t o analyse
the
reservoir
technological
and
operational
characteristics.
For a b e t t e r assessment o f
the
w a t e r r e s o u r c e s systems p e r f o r m a n c e s
behaviour
(outputs)
and
the ir
p e c u l i a r i t i e s , t h e main p r i n c i p l e s
on g l o b a l
r e l i a b i l i t y were s t a t e d ,
t a k i n g i n t o account n o t o n l y t h e
hydrological
events
(a 1 most
e x c l u s i v e l y used nowadays)
but the
stability,
functionality
and
other
involved
a s p e c t s as w e l l
(Dima 1978)

The
use o f
multiobjectivem u l t i c r i t e r i a analysis
techniques
i s one o f
the water
management
specialists' priorities
(Solacolu,
C e a c h i r 1978, l o n g u l e s c u , 1 9 8 6 ) .
When p r e p a r i n g t h e l o n g - t e r m
operating r u l e s
i n WRS
planning
activity
as
well
as
for
the
periodical updating of
these r u l e s
WRS
life
period,
along
the
s i m u l a t i o n models
(e.g.
GRINGO,
HOMBRE,
ARTIZAN,
UNDA,
PRAT)
and
s i m u l a t i o n - o p t i m i z a t i o n models ( i . e .
SIMOPR) a r e used.
The random f e a t u r e o f
most
water
resources c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
as
w e l l as o f
some w a t e r management
requirements o b l i g e us t o achieve i n
t h e WRS day b y day o p e r a t i o n s u c h a
regime o f s t o r i n g o r d i s c h a r g e water
trade-off
that allows a rational
between
the
updated
long-term
o p e r a t i o n r u l e s and t h e s y s t e m ' s
momentary
(actual)
cond i t i ons
(Predescu 1 9 8 2 ) .

-175-

The p r e p a r a t i o n o f o p e r a t i n g
a
decisions
i s achieved
within
continuous
iterative
analysis
feed-back
process
(Dima,
Cadariu,
Visan,
1980) w h e r e t h e
analysis
techniques f o r d e f i n i n g the system's
s t a t e p l a y an i m p o r t a n t r o l e .
The t e c h n i q u e s used r e f e r
to
explicit
procedures o f c l a s s i c type
(abaci,
diagrams,
preestablished
o p e r a t i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s ) as w e l l
as
mathematical
mode 1 s
se 1 ec t e d
to
the
problem
in
a c c o r d i ng
quest ion.
The
simulation-optimization
ALOC
model
based
on
the
Out-of-Kilter
a l g o r i t h m , i s used t o
d e v e l o p t h e m o n t h l y and q u a r t e r l y
operating plans o f the multipurpose
reservoirs.

A dynamic programming
model
minimizing
the
users'
operation
c o s t s was d e v e l o p e d f o r t h e o p t i m a l
a l l o c a t i o n o f w a t e r r e s o u r c e s among
water users
in
a
river
zone
( P a r v u l e s c u 1972)

R a i n f a l l - r u n o f f models
(Serban
1984)
are applied for
real-time
f o r e c a s t i n g o f w a t e r i n f l o w s a t WRS
entering points.

The PRAT s i m u l a t i o n model

(for
the
who1 e
WRS)
and
severa 1
s i m u l a t i o n models f o r s e l e c t i n g t h e
a
dam's
best
manoeuvres
of
hydromechanical
equipment
(Cadariu
1981, V o i n e a 1984) a r e u s e d i n t h e
d a y t o day a c t i v i t y d u r i n g f l o o d
p e r i ods

Some o f
t h e above m e n t i o n e d
models a r e d i r e c t l y a p p l i e d by t h e
l o c a l WRS o p e r a t i n g u n i t s b y means
of
their
own
computers
or
by
t e r m i n a l s connected t o
local
or
regional
centers.

The s t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t
i n Romania
o n t h e use m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l l i n g
techniques
in
water
resources
management p l a n n i n g i s p r e s e n t e d i n
a more e x h a u s t i v e manner o r i e n t e d t o
the
m a i n two c a t e g o r i e s ,
namely
s i m u l a t i o n techniques
(Mara,
Dima
1981)
and o p t i m i z a t i o n
techniques
(Visan,Dima 1 9 8 0 ) .
Ongoing e f f o r t s f o c u s on t h e
developments
and
refinements o f
systems
analysis
techniques,
especially
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
ones,
aiming t o provide a high-efficiency
c o o p e r a t i o n b e t w e e n w a t e r management
specialists,
systems a n a l y s t s and
decision-makers.

References
1.

AMAFTIESEI,
R.
- Programul
"UNDA"
pentru
cal cul ul
propagarii
viiturilor.
(The
"UNDA" f l o o d r o u t i n g model
and
programme),
Hidrotehnica, nr.2,
B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1976.

2 . AMAFTIESEI, R . - M o d e l u l "ARTIZAN"
p e n t r u c a l c u l u l a s i g u r a r i i c u apa
a f o l o s i n t e r l o r . A p 1 i c a t i e i n bazh i d r o g r a p h i c O l t . (ARTIZAN -mathe m a t i c a l model f o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e
m e e t i n g o f w a t e r demands.

3.

CHIRIAC, V . , e t a l .
- L a c u r i de
acumulare
(Storage r e s e r v o i r s )
Edit.CERES,Bucuresti,Romania,l976

- Model s i p r o g r a m de
iniu
calcul pentru exploatarea
l a c de a c u m u l a r e
i n r e g i m e de
and comput i ng
v i i t u r a . (Model
program f o r r e s e r v o i r o p e r a t i o n
during floodperiods)
Hidrotechnica,nr.7,Bucresti,
Romania,lg81.

4. CADARIU, R .

5 . CRETU, Ghe. - O p t i m i z a r e a s i s t e m e l o r de g o s p o d a r i r e
a apelor
(Water R e s o u r c e s Systems o p t i m i z a t i o n ) . Edit.FACLA,Timisoara,
Tomania, 1980.

6. DIACON, A.,

e t al.
Daily
o p t i m i z a t i o n o f power
generat i o n i n cascade h y d r o s t y s t e m a s t o c h a s t i c approach,
Journal
o f Hydrology
nr.
51,
1981,
Amsterdam.

7.

DIACONU,
C.
et
al.
Possibilities for reconstructing
to
the
data
corresponding
natural hydrological
conditions
- Casebook o n methods o f
computation
of
quantitative
changes
in
the
hydrological
regime o f
r i v e r b a s i n s due t o
human a c t i v i t y .
P r o j e c t 5.1
IHP, Unesco, 1980.

8. DIMA,

I.
Posibilitati
de
u t i 1 izare
a
tehn i c i 1o r
de
analiza a sistemelor l a studiul
lucrarilor
de
comb a t e r ea
inundatiilor
(On t h e u s e o f
System A n a l y s i s T e c h n i q u e s
in
Structural
Flood
Control).
5, B u c u r e s t i ,
Hidrotehnica, nr.
Romani a, 1975.

9.

DIMA,

I.

15.

- The O u t - o f - K i l t e r
its
A l g o r i t h m and
some
of
a p p l i c a t i o n s i n Water R e s o u r c e s .
Symposium f o r w a t e r management
p r o b l e m s , Budapest, 1976.

16. KINDLER, J.
Fiabilitate

( R e l i a b i l i t y ) , Hidrotehnica, n r .
2, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1980.

10. DIMA,

I . ; CADARIU, R . ; VISAN, V .
Graf i c
de
exploatare

STEGAROIU, P.
Planul
d e a m e n a j a r e complexa a
b a z i n u l u i Muresul S u p e r i o r
(The
Upper
Mures
river
basin
m u l t i p u r p o s e development p l a n ) .
Hidrotehnica, nr.
3, B u c u r e s t i ,
Romani a, 1978.

17. LAZARESCU, F . ;

(Operation
pol icy
f o r water
resources system),
Hidrotehnica
nr.
5,
(Enciclopedi
apelor),
B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1980.

1 1 . DIMA,

I . ; VISAN, V.
Model d e
simulare-optimizare
- S I MOPTpentru
analiza
parametrilor
de
gospodarire a
sistemelor
mu1 t i p l e
apelor
cu
scopuri
(S I MOPT
simulation

OIMA, 1 .
- Simulare
(Simulation).
Hidrotehnica, nr.
7, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1982.

18. MARA, L . :

'

o p t i m i z a t i o n model f o r t h e s t u d y
of
technical
parametres
of
m u l t i p u r p o s e water
management
systems), H i d r o t e h n i c a , n r .
10,
B u c r e s t i , Romania, 1981.
12.DULCU,
G.
- L'emploi de l a
banque
de
donnees
pour
l ' a m nagement de de c o u r s d ' e a u
XV i ernes
journees
de
l ' h y d r a u l i q u e , Toulouse, France,

C.
- Optimizarea
r e p a r t i t i e i r e s u r s e l o r de apa
for
o p t imal
(Techn i q u e s
a l l o c a t i o n of water resources),
S t u d i i d e economia a p e l o r , v o l .
I O B u c u r e s t i , 1972.

19. PARVULESCU,

20.

PREDESCU,
C.
- Utilizarea
in
graf i c e l o r
d i specer
lacuri lor
de
exp 1 oa t a r e a
acumulare
(Use
of
long-term
operating
rules
in
storage
reservoirs
current operation)
5, B u c u r e s t i ,
Hidrotehnica, nr.
Romania, 1982.

21.

SOLACOLU,
P.;
CEACHIR,
0.
Optimizarea
solutiilor
de
amenajare complexa a a p e l o r i n
comparat i i 1 o r
cazu 1
pluricriteriale
(Multiobjective
technique
for
ana 1 y s e s
optimization
of
multipurpose
water
resources
development
alternatives)
Hidrotehnica, nr.
2, B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1979.

1978.
I.,
et
al.
Gospodarirea
Apelor.
Manua 1
pentru
scol i
tehnice
(Water
for
management;
Handbook
technicians).
Edit.
Oidactica
si
pedagogica,
B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1965.

13. HORTOPAN,

FI. I n problema
deciziilor rnulticriteriale
(On
mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
deci s ions
the
problems).
H i d r o t e c h n i c a , nr.6,
B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1986. w a t e r

1 4 . IORGULESCU,

KING, I . P . ; FILIPKOWSKI,
A.
The O u t - o f - K i l t e r A l g o r i t h m as a
single
step
method
for
s i m u l a t i o n and o p t i m i z a t i o n o f
Vistula
Planning Alternatives.
I n t e r n a t i ona 1
Symposium
on
ma thema t i c a 1
modelling
*i n
h y d r o l o g y , Warsaw, 1971.

-177-

P.
et al.
- cu
pr i v i r e
la
j u s t if i carea
econornica
a
investitiilor
in
lucrarile
de
combater e
a
inundati i l o r
(On t h e e c o n o m i c a l
justification
of
investment
costs
in
structural
flood control),Hidrotehnica, nr.
1 , B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1982.

2 2 . SOLACOLU,

23.

AL.
- Mathematical
STANESCU,V.
model
for
the
f 1 oodwaves
estimation.
Meteorology
and
Hydrology, n r .
2.
I n s t i t u t e of
Meteorology
and
Hydrology,
B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1974.

24. STEGAROIU, P .
- R e s u r s e l e de
apa u t i l i z a b i l e a l e r i u r i l o r
inter ioare
(avai l a b l e
water
resources o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v ers)
Hidrotechnica nr.
11,
B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1982.
25. S E R B A N ,

P.

2 6 . TEODORESCU,
et
al.
Gospodarirea
Apelor
(Water
Management) ,
Edi t u r a
CERES,
B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1973.
UMBRESI,
Al.,
BURCEA,
M.
MEREUTA,
D.
- Conceptii s i
metode p r i v i n d p r a c t i c a r e a b a l apei
s i a p i r g h i i l o r economice
pentru valorificarea
superioara
a
resurselor
de
apa
( c o n c e p t s and methods r e l a t e d t o
t h e p r a c t i c e o f w a t e r management
b a l a n c e and o f
economic
tools
for
the better u t i l i z a t i o n of
water
resources)
Appl i ed
Cybernetics
E d i t u r a Academiei
R.S.R.,
Bucuresti,
Romania,

1985.

VISAN,
V.;
DIMA,
I.
Optimizare
(Optimization)
11,
Hidrotehnica,
nr.
B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1981.

29. V O I N E A , B.
- Metoda de c a l c u l
aprioric
a1
manevrelor
la
echipamentele hidromecanice
ale
barajelor
i n p e r i o a d a d e ape
mari.
(Method f o r t h e a p r i o r i
computing o f o p e r a t i n g schedule
hydromechanic
for
dams '
equ i pments
d u r i ng
f 1 oods)
nr
10,
Hidrotehnica,
B u c u r e s t i , R o m a n i a , 1984.

30. X X X
- Stochastic optimization
and s i m u l a t i o n
techniques
for
management o f
regional
water
r e s o u r c e s systems.
Texas Water
USA,
1971,
Development B o a r d ,
1972-

- Guideline
E v a l u a t i o n , UNIDO,
1972

31. X X X
Compunerea

uti 1 izind
mode 1 e
vi iturilor
matematice
ploaie-scurgere
(Rainfall-runoof
mathematical
mode 1 s
for
flood
waves
nr.
composition), Hidrotehnica,
12.
B u c u r e s t i , Romania, 1984.

27

28.

for
Project
UN, New Y o r k ,

-179-

APPLICATION OF SIMULATION TECHNIQUES IN

WATER RESOURCES PLANNING IN THE GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

Alfred Becker und Dieter Kozerski

lnstitut fur Wasserwirtschaft. DDR-1190 Berlin
Schnellerstr. 140, GDR

1.
Increasing Complexity
Water Management

in

The d e v e l o p m e n t s
i n the
last
decade h a v e i n p a r t i c u l a r shown t h a t
i t becomes more a n d more d i f f i c u l t
i n a l l parts of the world

to
satisfy
municipal,
agricultural
and
industrial
w a t e r demands i n t h e r e q u i r e d
q u a n t i t y and/or q u a l i t y

t o protect
water
against p o l l u t i o n

t o provide a
protection.

resources

suff cient

a c c e p t a b l e s o l u t i o n s can be found i n
more and more c a s e s o n l y b y t h e
a p p l i c a t i o n of
mathematical
models
and
advanced
s y s tem
ana 1 ys i s
techniques.
(Cohon and Marks
1975,
Haimes
et al.
1975, H a i t h and
L o u c k s 1976, M a j o r 1 9 7 7 ) .
T h i s paper
is
related
to
p r o b l e m s as m e n t i o n e d above, i . e .
t o multiobjective optimization of
w a t e r r e s o u r c e s management i n r i v e r
b a s i n s r e g a r d i n g m u l t i p u r p o s e water
usage and r e s e r v o i r c o n t r o l a s p e c t s ,
with
special
regard
to
water
quantity.

flood

The number and v a r e t y o f w a t e r

u s e r s and o f p o l u t i o n s o u r c e s a r e
s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s ng and so a r e t h e
for
a
higher
requirements
supply
r e 1 i a b i 1 i t y of w a t e r
(in
q u a n t i t y and qua i t y ) as w e l l as f o r
flood protection.
I n many cases c o n f l i c t i n g p r o b lems a r i s e w h i c h c a n be s o l v e d o n l y
by a c e n t r a l i z e d p l a n n i n g o f appropr i a t e measures f o r r a t i o n a l
use o f
t h e a v a i l a b l e water
r e s o u r c e s such
as r e s e r v o i r s , w a t e r
t r a n s f e r chann e l s o r p i p e s , waste water t r e a t m e n t
p l a n t s , l e v e e systems e t c .
As
these p l a n n i n g procedures
have t o
consider
problems
and
arising
from
the
conf 1 i c t s
increasing
complexity
of
water
resources
systems
management,

2. The Special Importance of

Simulation Techniques in
Water Resources Project Planning
in Complex River Basins
I n the selection o f a modelling
approach
or
systems
analysis
technique f o r
the solution of the
b e f o r e - m e n t i o n e d p r o b l e m s two b a s i c
q u e s t i o n s h a v e t o b e answered:
(a) I s a d i r e c t o p t i m i z a t i o n
d e s i r e d o r a r e t h e t r a d e - o f f s of
p r i m a r y i n t e r e s t w h i c h r e s u l t from
different
planning
and
control
strategies?
(b)
Should t h e a n a l y s i s
be
based on s e l e c t e d c r i t i c a l p e r i o d s ,
e.g.
on observed h i s t o r i c a l
low
or
on
sets
of
f l o w periods,
generated
longer time s e r i e s o f t h e
hydrological
state
variables
expected i n t h e p l a n n i n g p e r i o d ?

A c c o r d i ng
to
international
developments
there
i s a declining
t r e n d i n t h e GDR i n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n
o f d i r e c t o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques
(question a),
and p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s
based o n s e l e c t e d c r i t i c a l
periods
( q u e s t i o n b) a r e o n l y a c c e p t e d as a
p r e - i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f more complex
modelling projects,
or
in
cases
where
t h e m o d e l l i n g approach cannot
b e a p p l i e d (because o f
a
lack of
time,research
capacity....).
This
means
t h a t s i m u l a t i o n techniques
using sets o f generated time s e r i e s
of
hydrological input variables are
GDR,
generally
preferred
i n the
particularly for
the derivation of
optimum d e s i g n
alternatives
and
optimum
control
strategies
for
m u l t i p u r p o s e r e s e r v o i r systems.
The m a i n r e a s o n s a r e :
(1)

In
most
cases
d ir e c t
optimization
techniques
(linear,
dynamic programming
e t c .)
can
be
applied
efficiently
on1 y
for
determined selected reference
conditions
(e.g.
an o b s e r v e d
or
given c r i t i c a l
period).
This
leads immediately t o t h e
question
for
the
optimum
s o l u t i o n i n o t h e r more o r l e s s
critical
periods
(see
e.g.
S h i a o and M c S p a r r a n 1 9 1 1 ) .
As a r e s u l t o f a p p l i c a t i o n s o f
d i r e c t o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques
i n t h e GDR, e . g .
t o determir,e
an
economical
o p t i mum
structure
of
a
water
d i s t r i b u t i o n system (Forner e t
al.
1980) o r t o o p t i m i z e t h e
control
strategy of
single
reservoirs
(Schramm 1981) , i t
turned out t h a t the calculated
o p t i m u m s e r v e d o q l y as
an
orientation while political,
territorial
and
water
management a s p e c t s were t a k e n
as
the
main
factors
in
decision-making
(sufficient
r e l i a b i l i t y of
water
supply
for
main users,
etc.).
Similar
e x p e r i e n c e has b e e n
made
i n the application of
u t i l i t y t h e o r y , w h i c h i s based
on a u n i f i e d e v a l u a t i o n o f a l l
a s p e c t s t o be c o n s i d e r e d
in

the
optimization
(social,
political,
environmental,
etc.)
(Keeney e t a l .
1976).
The a p p l i c a t i o n o f
explicit
stochastic
o p t i m i za t i o n
techniques
leads t o s e r i o u s
problems
in
the
case o f
systems
with
severa 1
r e s e r v o i r s , and t h e c h a n c e c o n s t r a i n e d - programming does
not f u l f i l l
a l l requirements
(Palmer e t a l .
1979).
The GDR i s one o f t h e European
where
water
c o u n t r i es
resources
are
relatively
s c a r c e and
i n m u l t i p l e use
(Dyck e t a l .
1980).
Low f l o w
and f l o o d f l o w p e r i o d s o c c u r
subsequently
with
typical
persistency
and
cluster
effects:
subsequent
1 o n g e r 1 ow
f 1 ow
periods
with
significant
deficiences
i n water
supply
f o r a number o f w a t e r u s e r s
sequences
of
major
dangerous f l o o d s .

and

cont r o1
Theref o r e
the
strategies,
especially
for
larger
reservoirs,
have t o
take
simultaneously
into
consideration
the
maximum
p o s s i b l e recharge o f water f o r
low f l o o d p e r i o d s and a l s o t h e
requirements
of
flood
p r o t e c t ion
for
dangerous
f l o o d s which can occur i n t h e
same p e r i o d .
T h a t means t h a t
low f l o w p e r i o d s and f l o o d s
have t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e
a
simulation
process
in
realistic
manner c o n c e r n i n g
their
time
structure,
m a g n i t u d e , sequence, e t c .
Water r e s o u r c e s e n g i n e e r s and
decision-makers
i n t h e GDR
have e x p r e s s e d t h e i r p r i mary
interest
i n r e s u l t s on t h e
efficiency
of
cons i d e r e d
planning
and
control
strategies.
This especially
concerns
information
on
trade-offs i n the r e l i a b i l i t y
figures
for
a l l water users,

-181-

h y d r o 1 o g i ca 1
in
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s on t h e f l o o d
regime,
i n water q u a l i t y e t c .
Preferred
is
information
in
f orm
of
probability
distribticn
functions,
cumulatve frequencies, e t c .
(6)

I nf o r m a t i o n
on
econom i c
f rom
effects
obtained
cost-benefitana 1 y s e s ,
cost-and-damage-analyses
etc.
is
appreciated
and
often
r e q u e s t e d as a supplement, b u t
i t i s n e v e r t a k e n as t h e o n l y
b a s i s i n decision-making.

The a s p e c t s m e n t i o n e d
under
(2) ,
(4)
(5)
and
(6)
have
particularly
i n i t ia t e d
the
d e v e 1 opmen t
of
an
efficient
computerized long-term
simulation
t e c h n i q u e (Schramm
1975) w h i c h
is
based
on
t h e Monte-Carlo-method
s i m i l n r t o t h a t i n t r o d u c e d b y Thomas
and F i e r i n g ( 1 9 6 2 ) , S v a n i d z e ( 1 9 8 4 ) ,
It
H u f s c h m i d t and F i e r i n g
(1966).
uses s y n t h e t i c
time series of the
hydrological input variables, allows
for
a
computation
of
numerous
p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n a l t e r n a t i v e s
and
p r o v i des
comprehensive
information
to
support
decision-making.
I n the f o l l o w i n g
some
special
features
of
the
above-mentioned s i m u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e
are
briefly
reported
and some
important
r e s u l t s and a p p l i c a t i o n
experiences presented.
the
For about one t h i r d o f
t e r r i t o r y of
t h e GDR
individual
r i v e r b a s i n models o f t h a t t y p e w e r e
i n t r o d u c e d and h a v e been r e g u l a r l y
a p p l i e d f o r long-term
balancing o f
w a t e r demands and a v a i l a b l e w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s and
t o select
optimum
long-term
planning
and
control
strategies
for
the river basin
system
(Gruenewald e t a l .
1977,
Becker e t a l .
1978, R i e c h e r t e t a l .
1979, B o t h , K o t e r s k i 1980, D i e t z ,
1981,
Boehme 1980,
Lehmann e t a l .
Schramm
1981).
The
successful
application
of
the
d e v e 1 oped
simulation
technique
may
be
e x p l a i n e d p r i m a r i l y as f o l l o w s :

J(

The s i m u l a t i o n a l g o r i t h m s o f
t h e models
are
clear
and
understandable f o r
t h e model
users
and
the
complex
c o n d i t i o n s o f water
resources
in
use
and
management
e x t e n s i v e l y used r i v e r b a s i n s
can
be
represented
more
realistically
than
in
applications
of
direct
o p t i m i z a t i o n techniques.
The r e s u l t s p r o v i d e d b y t h e
model
clearly
reflect
the
effects of
a given
control
measure ( d e c i s i o n a l t e r n a t i v e ) .
The
confidence
of
the
d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s i n t h e model i s
p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n f i r m e d by t h e
f a c t that results obtained f o r
simple decision
alternatives
meet t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e .
There
is
no
a
priori
restriction
of
the decision
r a n g e b e c a u s e t h e model d o e s
not
require
preselected
criteria for
the computation
(e.g.
a dis t in c t o b j e c t i v e
f u n c t i o n o r assumptions o f
the
decision-maker
on p r e f e r e n c e
It
structures
etc)
enables t h e decision-maker
to
extend step-by-step the desired
information
on
the
system
behaviour,
the efficiency o f
new w a t e r
s t r u c t u r e s , changed
control
strategies,
the
trade-offs, etc.
according to
the
progress
of
the
simulation.

The i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d c a n b e
u s e d a l s o as
a
basis
for
a collective
decision-making
which
i n c l u d e s w a t e r u s e r s and
other interested authorities.
These
conclusions
are
c o n f i r m e d by a
publication
of
K i nd 1 e r
(1981)
in
which
he
i1 lustrates
the
step-by-step
p r o g r e s s i n an i n t e r a c t i v e c o m p u t e r
aided d e c i s i o n procedure r e f e r r i n g
t o a d e f i n i t e selected hydrological
situation.

-182-

3.

Short
Summary
of Characteristics of the Advanced
Version of the Simulation Model
The
simulation
technique
mentioned
before
has
been
s y s t e m a t i c a l l y improved d u r i n g t h e
l a s t years.
The m a i n o b j e c t i v e o f
t h i s r e s e a r c h work was t o s e t u p a
p r o g r a m s y s t e m w h i c h c a n e a s i l y be
a d a p t e d t o any g i v e n r i v e r b a s i n and
which a l l o w s f o r a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f
3:

v a r i o u s p l a n n i n g and management
alternatives

fc

d i f f e r e n t w a t e r demand f i g u r e s
( i n c l u d i n g seasonal v a r i a t i o n s
or
trends
over
a
longer
planning period)

J:

long observed o r s y n t h e t i c series o f hydrological input variables characterizing the availa b l e s u r f a c e water resources.

The advanced v e r s i o n o f
the
p r o g r a m s y s t e m has
self-adapting
f e a t u r e s so t h a t w i t h i n a s i n g l e
computer
run
the
specific
sub-programs
and a l g o r i t h m s f o r a
given r i v e r basin are automatically
generated according t o the s p e c i f i c
input data
(Kozerski
1981).
The
program f a c i l i t a t e s
(1)

(2)

t h e t r e a t m e n t o f any g i v e n r i v e r
system
the investigation of
different
s y s t e m s t r u c t u r e s and c o n t r o l
strategies

(3) t h e o p t i o n a l use o f o b s e r v e d
synthetic
time
series
hydrological input variables

(4) t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n
of representing
resul ts.

or
as

of
the form
the simulation

The b a s i c components o f
the
advanced
program,
their
i n t e r c o n n e c t i o n s and i n t e g r a t i o n i n
t h e d e c i s i o n process a r e represented
1.
i n a general
form
i n Fig.
Supplementary
informat ion
on
i m p o r t a n t measures c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e
p l a n n i n g process i s g i v e n i n Fig.2.
Main p a r t s o f t h e program a r e :

(A)

t h e s t o c h a s t i c s i m u l a t i o n model
for
the
hydrological
input
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which d e f i n e the
a v a i l a b l e water resources

(B)

the
deterministic
water
management model w h i c h s i m u l a t e s
strategies
of
water
g iv e n
allocation, reservoir operation
etc.
i n t h e r i v e r b a s i n , and
provides the r e g i s t r a t i o n
of
water
supply
deficiencies,
resulting
damages
and o t h e r
state conditions o f interest for
the
final
s t a t i s t i ca 1
eva 1 u a t i on.

An a d d i t i o n a l component

is

(C)

for
the

the
program
representation
output data.

of

the
model

The l a s t m e n t i o n e d p r o g r a m and
t h e d a t a d i s p a t c h i n g p r o c e d u r e were
special
designed on t h e b a s i s of
data
identification,
c h e c k i n g and
preprocessing
procedures
which
e n a b l e any g i v e n r i v e r b a s i n s y s t e m
( o r system s t r u c t u r e ) t o be m o d e l l e d
by simple i n p u t d a t a s p e c i f i c a t i o n
( i n s t e a d o f s o f t w a r e d e v e l o p m e n t as
r e q u i r e d i n p r e v i o u s models.)
I t
should be mentioned
that
those
p r i n c i p l e s a r e on-I i n e w i t h r e c e n t
i n t e r n a t i o n a l trends.
Other e s s e n t i a l
principles
t h e program d e v e l o p m e n t were:
(1)

in

The
deterministic
water
management
model
(B)
was
completely separated from the
s t o c h a s t i c s i m u l a t i o n model ( A ) ,
which g e n e r a t e s
intercorrelated
time
series of
the required
hydrological
input
variables
of
(e.g.
monthly
averages
streamf low).
These
input
v a r i a b l e s a r e s t o r e d on m a g n e t i c
t a p e and can b e r e a d i n t o t h e
main s t o r a g e f o r
each a c t u a l
computation.

(2) The

general i z a t i o n
of
the
d e t e r m i n i s t i c w a t e r management
model
(B)
which simulates t h e
processes o f water
allocation,
u t i l i z a t i o n and management i n a
r i v e r basin, including reservoir
o p e r a t i o n , was a c h i e v e d by means

-183-

o f t y p i f i e d algorithms
for
the
various operations occurring i n
t h e system.

(3)

The
p r og r am
for
the
representation
of
the
c o m p u t z t i o n r e s u l t s (C) was a l s o
g e n e r a l i z e d w i t h r e g a r d t o two
forms o f d a t a
lists
(tables)
p r i n t e d b y t h e computer.

Because i t i s t h e p e r f o r m a n c e
features
(general
applicability,
flexibility,
etc.)
t h a t makes t h e
advanced model v e r s i o n a t t r a c t i v e
for
practical
application,
some
essential
d e t a i l s w i l l be d e s c r i b e d
b r i e f l y i n a l a t e r chapter.

4. Assessment of the Available

Water Resources and
Hydrological
Input
Characteristics
for
the
Planning of Water Resources Systems
Management
I t i s q u i t e obvious t h a t t h e
reliability
of
the hydrological
i n f o r m a t i o n used i n t h e p l a n n i n g
process i s e x t r e m e l y e s s e n t i a l
for
the
reliability of
the r e s u l t s .
Errors
i n the hydrological
input
information w i l l affect
a l l subsequent steps o f t h e planning process
and can l e a d t o i n a d e q u a t e d e c i s i o n s
(wrong
design o f
new s t r u c t u r e s
etc.).
Thus
new o r i e n t a t i o n s
are
needed
during
the
International
H y d r o l o g i c a l Programme f o r
future
r e s e a r c h ir, t h i s f i e l d due t o t h e
following
general
problems
in
hydrology:
(i)

The h y d r o l o g i c a l
systems a r e
i n c r e a s i n g l y a f f e c t e d b y human
i n f l u e n c e s . Hence, i n f o r m a t i o n
on
the
available
water
r e s o u r c e s and o n t h e h y d r o l o g ical
regime derived
f rom
data
ser ies
ex i s t i ng
cannot be s i m p l y e x t r a p o l a t e d
i n t o the planning periods t o
be i n v e s t i g a t e d .

( i i ) Long-term
c l imatic
changes
m o d i f i e d by
i n c r e a s i n g human
impacts can a l s o i n f l u e n c e t h e
availability
of
the water
resources.

Therefore i t w i l l
become more
and more n e c e s s a r y t o compute t h e
ava l a b l e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s b y means
of
hydrological
models o f
river
bas ns f r o m m e t e o r o l o g i c a l
input
fields
(precipitation,
evapotranspiration)
taking
into
account
the effects o f
expected
c l i m a t i c changes ( t r e n d s , e t c . ) .
As
generalized techniques
f o r s u c h an
approach
were not a v a i l a b l e t h e
approved s i m u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e based
on t h e
Monte-Carlo-principle
as
i n t r o d u c e d b y Schramm
(1975) was
a p p l i ed
I t
generates
time
series
of
intercorreiated
hydrological
input characteristics
o f any d e s i r e d l e n g t h , e.g.
20 s e t s
of 50-year
records o f monthly r i v e r
discharges,
as
s t o c h a s t i c,
multidimensional,
unsteady ,
t r a n s f o r m e d normal
distributed
of
higher
order
Markov-process
(Schramm 1975).
I n some c o u n t r i e s t h e a p p r o a c h
was a r g u e d a g a i n s t as f o l l o w s :
the
generated time s e r i e s cannot supply
more
information than the shorter
o b s e r v e d ones w h i c h a r e t a k e n as t h e
basis f o r the synthetic
generation;
observed s i n g l e extreme events a r e
inadmissably extrapolated
i n t o the
p l a n n i n g h o r i z o n ; t h e r e f o r e t h e use
of
t h e observed r e c o r d s f o r
the
p l a n n i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n seems
t o be
the best solution.
As
reply
to
t h e s e a r g u m e n t s t h e f o l l o w i n g may b e
said:
Probability d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f the
hydrological,
water
resources
related variables,
e.g.
river
discharges,
have t o b e based on
s u f f i c i e n t l y large data sets
in
all
r a n g e s t o be c o n s i d e r e d .
This
is
o n l y guaranteed
if
1o n g e r
time
s e r i es
are
available.

(2)
The a p p l i c a t i o n
of
the
multidimensional
generation
technique
ensures
that
the
in the
information
involved
longest observed records o f
the
r i v e r b a s i n under c o n s i d e r a t i o n
i s generalized.
In addition t o
this
the empirical d i s t r i b u t i o n

prof i le)
This vector
i s then
also
used
as a "downstream
operator"
wh i c h
o r g a n i zes
a
downstream c o m p u t a t i o n b y means
=
of the simple operation K '

functions
and t h o s e
received
from
t h e g e n e r a t e d t i m e s e r i es
c a n b e c r i t i c a l l y r e v i e w e d and
compared w i t h t h o s e d e r i v e d f r o m
available
long records o f other
i n order
to
avoid
stations,
errors of
t h e abcve-mentioned
character.

NEXT(K)

(b) A c c o r d i n g l y
a
generalized
a l l w a t e r uses
d e s c r i p t i o n for
was i n t r o d u c e d w h i c h a l l o w s one
t o s p e c i f y (see T a b l e 2 and F i g .
5) :

(3) Long g e n e r a t e d

t i m e s e r i e s of
discharges
which
adequately
r e f l e c t the s t a t i s t i c s o f
the
real
process include a larger
variety of
c r i t i c a l events o r
sequences
of
such
events
(deficiency
periods,
floods,
etc.) than t h e observed records.

The w i d e p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n
o f t h e approved s i m u l a t i o n technique
has c o n f i r m e d i t s p r a c t i c a l e f f i c i e n c :y

1':

the
1ocat ion
of
water
w i t h d r a w a l (PE) and r e t u r n f l o w
(PR)

9:

the r e l a t e d q u a n t i t i e s
(E,
R)
as
constant
or
seasonally
v a r y i n g v a l u e s (e.g. m o n t h l y ) .

.
J;

5.
Advanced Version
Simulation Technique

of

the

The b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s o f
the
advanced v e r s i o n o f
the simulation
model
f o r water
r e s o u r c e s systems
management w h i c h may b e a p p l i e d a l s o
f o r o t h e r purposes a r e d e s c r i b e d
in
another p u b l i c a t i o n (Kozerski 1981).
H e r e o n l y a s h o r t summary s h o u l d b e
given:
(a) To d e s c r i b e t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f
a given
river
network
a1 1
balance
points
and
system
elements
along
the
rivers
( l o c a t i o n o f water withdrawals
and r e l e a s e s ,
of
reservoirs,
etc.)
a r e denoted by decimal
3 and c o l . 1
numbers (see F i g .
of
Table
1).
This notation
a l l o w s one t o r e f e r
to
any
existing
river
s y s tem
c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and t o
include
or
exclude intermediate balance
p o i n t s w i t h o u t any r e d e n o t i n g o f
For
internal
other
points.
purposes o f t h e computer program
I S
the
decimal
notat ion
automatically
transformed
into
a n i n t e g e r n u m e r a t i o n (see T a b l e
1).
For each b a l a n c e p o i n t t h e
n e x t downstream b a l a n c e p o i n t i s
t h e network
s p e c i f i e d so t h a t
configuration
is
entirely
d e f i n e d by t h e s i n g l e v e c t o r
NEXT
(K) : ( N E X T ( K )
= 999
characterizes
the
closing

p r e f e r e n c e numbers (Z) d e f i n i n g
the
a p r i o r i t y sequence o f
preference
users
(sma 1 1 e r
number
denotes
h i gher
priority)

(c) The p r o c e s s o f w a t e r
resources
u t i l i z a t i o n and management
is
simulated
i n each c o m p u t a t i o n a l
s t e p as f o l l o w s :

- Reading

of
the
required
hydrological
input variables
(e.g.
uninfluenced discharges)
from a d a t a s t o r a g e u n i t .

- Allocaticn

o f water
to
all
u s e r s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r demand
the available
and p r i o r i t y ,
water
resources
and
the
r e 1ease
of
water
from
r e s e r v o i r s , i f necessary.

Calculation o f
the resulting
s t a t e c o n d i t i o n s ( a c t u a l water
supply,
reduced
discharges,
actual
reservo ir
storages,
etc.)

- Registration

of
these
state
variables (cumulative counting)
according t o a specified l i s t
o f p r e s e l e c t e d v a r i a b l e s and
events t o be analysed.

Water w i t h d a w a l and r e t u r n f l o w
may b e l o c a t e d a t t h e same
N 204 i n
b a l a n c e p o i n t (e.g.
3) o r a t d i f f e r e n t ones
Fig.

-185-

(e.g.
N 102).
A user can be
subdivided i n t o several
user
elements ( p o r t i o n s o f water use
of
different
importance which
are specified
by
different
preference
numbers,
e.g.
N 103 i n t o t h e
s p l i t t i n g of
N
103.1
the
elements
so-called
b a s i c demand
with
preference
number
50 - and
N 103.2
t h e r e s i d u a l demand
w i t h p r e f e r e n c e number
180).
The sequence o f
users
i n the
I S
allocation
procedure
c o n t r o l l e d i n each t i m e s t e p b y
( f rom
t h e p r e f e r e n c e numbers
smaller
t o h i g h e r ones), e.g.
t h e system o f
users g i v e n
in
Table
1
i s computed
i n the
following
sequence:
N 103.1,
N 305, N 102, N 103.2, N 204.

(d) R e s e r v o i r s c a n
be
d e s c r i bed
analogously i n t h e i r location,
capacity,
c o n s e r v a t i o n volume,
f l o o d c o n t r o l volume, e t c .
The
use o f t h e r e s e r v o i r s f o r water
s u p p l y i s s p e c i f i e d by " r e l e a s e
elements",
w h i c h a l s o have a
preference
number.
Here
a
number
Z = 100 means t h a t f r o m
t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g r e s e r v o i r zone
water releases a r e allowed f o r
a l l users of higher p r i o r i t y ( i n
Table 2 those
are
N 102,
N 103.2, N 2 0 4 ) . Thus, b y means
o f a few d a t a m a n i f o l d r e s e r v o i r
- u s e r r e l a t i o n s can
be
described including subdivision
of
the
reservoirs
into
I f t h e computed
sub-zones.
storage
volume
exceeds
the
c o n s e r v a t i o n zone volume t h e n
i n c r e a s e d r e l e a s e s a r e computed
according t o the capacity of the
river
bed downstream o f
the
reservoir.
A n o t h e r f a c i l i t y o f t h e computer
program
(optional
avai l a b l e )
enables
t h e user t o
integrate
s p e c i f i c algorithms
(so-called
"dynamic
elements")
which a r e
not
covered by t h e s t a n d a r d
e l e m e n t s o f t h e advanced model
(including
c a l l s of
external
subprograms i n F O R T R A N o r A L G O L ,
and t o c o n s i d e r s t a t e d e p e n d e n t
m o d i f i c a t i o n s of the a l l o c a t i o n

procedure
(as e . g .
smaller
q u a n t i t i e s o f water
withdrawals
i n case o f exceedence o f a g i v e n
l i m i t discharge, e t c . ) .
The d e s i r e d f l e x i b i l i t y
and
simplicity
of
the
data output
p r o g r a m was a n a l o g o u s l y a c h i e v e d b y
defining
two
basic
types
of
r e g i s t r a t i on:
type 1

- r e g i s t r a t i o n o f any d e s i r e d variables
(e.g. d i s c h a r g e s
a t balance,points,withdrawa l s o f u s e r s , e t c . ) and o u t put o f p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f exceedence o f d e f i n i t e d i s charges i n t h e form o f d a t a
l i s t s a s shown i n T a b l e 3.

type 2

r e g i s t r a t i o n of the f i r s t
m o n t h and o f t h e d u r a t i o n
of the c r i t i c a l
events or
conditions
(e.g.
duration
of
exceedence o f
g iv e n
l i m i t discharges,
duration
of definite
deficiencies
i n water supply
etc.)
and
output of the data l i s t s .

An e x a m p l e o f a t y p e 1 - o u t p u t
f o r a lowland r i v e r i n t h e GDR
is
shown i n T a b l e 3 ( p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f
exceedence o f t h e d i s c h a r g e s
listed
in
column 1 o f T a b l e 3 ) .
The
t y p i c a l seasonal
variation of
the
discharges
can be c l e a r l y seen.
While
the discharge
in
February
always
exceeds
19
m3/s
(100%
probabi 1 i t y
of
exceedence)
the
m o n t h l y d i s c h a r g e i n August i s w i t h i n t h e i n v e s t i g a t e d 100 y e a r s p e r i o d
t w e n t y t i m e s b e l o w 1 m3/s ( o n l y 80%
p r o b a b i l i t y o f exceedence) .A m o n t h l y
minimum discharge o f e . g . 6 m3/s c a n
b e g u a r a n t e e d h e r e o n l y b y means o f
additional
reservoirs
or
water
transfers
or ,
when
t h e smal 1
summer d i s c h a r g e s a r e c a u s e d e . g .
by
irrigation
water
losses
by
modifying the allocation strategy or
by changing
the p r i o r i t i e s .
The
outprint
of
similar
probability
l i s t s can be s p e c i f i e d f o r w a t e r
SUPPI Y
deficiencies
of
any
water
user
of
interest,
for
storage
volumes
in
reservoirs
etc.,
as w e l l
as
for
durations
o f c r i t i c a l periods (type 2 ) .

These t a b l e s a r e d i r e c t l y u s e d
decision-making or f o r p l o t t i n g
to
i l l u s t r a t e the trade-offs
of
c o n f l i c t i n g objectives
as
i n Fig.
4.
Fig.
4 was d e r i v e d i n
an
i nves t i g a t i on
for
the
ear 1 i e r
Rappbode r e s e r v o i r
system w i t h a
108 H i o m 3
t o t a l s t o r a g e volume of
(Becker e t a l .
1978).
for

The u p p e r p a r t o f
the f i g u r e
the
illustrates
t h e decrease of
r e l i a b i l i t y o f d r i n k i n g water supply
with
increasing
drinking
water
withdrawal.
it
is
further
remarkable t h a t
t h i s decrease
is
i f the d r i n k i n g water
much s m a l l e r
s u p p l y has a h i g h e r p r i o r i t y
than
the release o f
r e s e r v o i r water f o r
l o w f l o w a u g m e n t a t i o n (Curve 1)

T h e - lower p a r t of
Fig.
4
illustrates
t h e decrease of
the
r e l i a b i l i t y o f d r i n k i n g water supply
w i t h i n c r e a s i n g f l o o d c o n t r o l volume
1)
and
the
according
(Curve
d e c r e a s e s i n f l o o d r i s k (Curve 2 ) .
On t h e b a s i s o f
Fig.
4a
the reservoir
c o n t r o l s t r a t e g y for
s y s t e m was f i n a l l y d e f i n e d w h i c h i s
accepted
by
a1 1
interested
a u t h o r i t i e s and w h i c h i n t h i s sense
r e p r e s e n t s an optimum.

6. Simulation of Floods for

the Consideration and Planning of
Flood Protection
The m o s t d a n g e r o u s phases o f
floods
often
occur d u r i n g a few
in
d a y s or e v e n h o u r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y
small
and medium m o u n t a i n o u s r i v e r
basins.
Therefore
a
simulation
model w h i c h w o r k s o n a m o n t h l y b a s i s
cannot adequately
take account of
the real
flood
risk
(peak
flows,
inundation etc.)
and
duration of
other
a p p r o a c h e s have t o b e a p p l i e d
for flood investigations.
After
a
first
attempt o f d i s t r i b u t i n g d a i l y
f l o w s around t h e generated monthly
mean f l o w b y means o f s i m p l e a v e r a g e
d i s t r i b u t i o n functions {Krippendorf,
Schramm
1970)
the
f o l lowing
t e c h n i q u e was d e v e l o p e d and a p p l i e d
( B e c k e r , K o z e r s k i 1976).
Typical
dimensionless
flood
hydrograph p a t t e r n s
( d a i l y flows)
were d e r i v e d from a l a r g e r number o f

observed f l o o d s .
These were t h e n
used t o c a l c u l a t e d a i l y f l o o d f l o w s
i n months t h e g e n e r a t e d mean f l o w o f
w h i c h was i d e n t i f i e d as
influenced
bv a f l o o d .
The D a r t i c u l a r f l o o d
f!ow
p a t t e r n was s e l e c t e d by
a
random e x p e r i m e n t ( u r n e x p e r i m e n t ) .

A result
obtained
by
the
t h i s technique f o r
a p p l i c a t i o n of
t h e Saale r e s e r v c i r s y s t e m i s shown
i n Fig.
5 . I t indicates that
is
an i n c r e a s e d f l o o d r i s k
givep d u r i n g February,
March
and A p r i l , d e s p i t e an i n c r e a s e
o f t h e f l o o d c o n t r o l volume by
15 M i o m 3 f r o m November u n t i l
i n Curve A
March,
as shown
( f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e s of t h e f l o o d
control
volume
cannot
be
of
the
accepted
because
decreasing
re1 iabi 1 i t i e s
of
water
supplies
during
the
summer).
an e f f i c i e n t r e l e a s e s t r a t e g y
for
t h e f l o o d c o n t r o l volume
b e f o r e and i m m e t i i a t e l y a f t e r
a
f l o o d can remarkably reduce t h e
f l o o d r i s k from F e b r u a r y u n t i l
A p r i l (Curve B i n s t e a d o f C
in
5).
Fig.

As n e x t s t e p
a
stochastic
simulation
technique f o r the d i r e c t
generation of d a i l y
flood
flows
w i t h i n a l o n g - t e r m s i m u l a t i o n model
has been d e v e l o p e d
and
applied
1977).
This
(Gruenewald e t a l .
technique i s described i n a s p e c i a l
paper
(Becker e t a l .
1979). The
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e lower p a r t o f
4
is
a
r e s u l t of
the
Fig.
application of
this
technique f o r
t h e Rappbode r e s e r v o i r system.
I n cases o f s e p a r a t e p l a n n i n g
of
f l o o d p r o t e c t i o n measures, i . e .
w i t h o u t simultaneous
consideration
of water s u p p l y problems, a s e p a r a t e
s i m u l a t i o n of s i n g l e f l o o d events i s
acceptable.
An
example
of
a p p l i c a t i o n where a b o u t 300 f l o o d
from
h y d r o g r a p h s were c a l c u l a t e d
synthetical l y
generated
2-hour-rainfall
d a t a b y means o f
deterministic
r i v e r b a s i n models i s
also
d e s c r i bed
in
the
a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d p u b l i c a t i o n (Becker
et al.
1 9 7 9 ) . One r e s u l t o f t h i s

-187-

a p p l i c a t i o n (Fig.
6) shows t h a t t h e
r e d u c t i o n o f f l o o d peak f l o w b y an
uncontrolled reservoir
i s strongly
discharge
dependent,
and
that
a
therefore the
investigation of
selected flood
(e.g.
a
design
flood)
i s not appropriate.
The
r e s u l t s c a n n o t be e x t r a p o l a t e d t o
other f l o o d events.
This underlines the necessity
of
i n v e s t i g a t i n g a l a r g e number o f
events, o f generated time s e r i e s o f
streamflows etc.
as e x p l a i n e d i n
Chapter 4 .

7 . Conclusions
For t h e p l a n n i n g
of
water
resources
systems
design
and
of
management
the
appl i c a t i o n
simulation techniques
which
use
s t o c h a s t i c a l l y generated t i m e s e r i e s
o f water
resources c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
i n a d e t e r m i n i s t i c water
management
model has been w i d e l y a c c e p t e d .
The
advanced v e r s i o n o f t h i s
type of
model c a n e a s i l y be a d a p t e d t o a
river
basin
by
data
g iv e n
I S
s p e c i f i c a t i o n alone.
This
a c c o m p l i s h e d t h r o u g h a u t o m a t i c gener a t i o n of the specific
subprograms
f o r t h e r i v e r b a s i n t o be m o d e l l e d .
To f a c i l i t a t e t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f
a
s e r i e s o f management a l t e r n a t i v e s
(typically
differing
in
a few
numer i c a 1
parameters from
one
another)
the
computer
program
package a l l o w s f o r an easy
input
d a t a m o d i f i c a t i o n which a v o i d s t h e
repeated i n p u t o f
a large
number
I t can b e s a i d t h a t
o f d a t a cards.
t h e model i s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e f o r
practical application.
The f l e x i b i l i t y and s i m p l i c i t y
of
t h e advanced model and t h e f a c t
t h a t t h e r e s u l t s o f the computations
are provided
in
the
form
of
probability
distributions
of
se 1 ec t e d
water
resources
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r a l l months o f
the
year
(e.g. p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f
exceedence
of
given
limit
discharges,
supply
deficiencies
e t c . ) a r e considered as main reasons
for
t h e wide p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n
o f t h e mode: f o r r i v e r b a s i n s i n t h e

GDR.

References
U.
B e c k e r , A . ; G o s , E ; Gruerlewald,
M
u
l
t
i
s
i
t
e
s
i
m
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
(1979) :
of
f l o o d f l o w f o r d e s i g n i n g and
reservoir
systems.
operating
on S p e c i f i c Aspects
Int.
Sym
o f H y d r o l o g i c a l Computations f o r
Water
Projects.
Unesco,
Leningrad, Sept.
1979.

Gecker, A . :
Kozerski,
D.
(1976):
Simulation
der
Hochwassersteuerung
innerhalb
e i nes
Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodells.
WWT,
26.
Jg.,
H.
7, S .
235-239
Becker, A.; K r i p p e n d o r f , H.; T h i e l e ,
W.
(1978) :
E insatz
von
Modellen fur e i n e e f f e k t i v e r e
Bewirtschaftung
der
Oberflaechengewaesser.
Die
Technik,
33.
Jg.,
H.
8, S .
432-435.

B o t h , W.;
K o z e r s k i , D.
(1980):
Das
LBM
Spree-Berl i n
und
seine
Anwendung
in
der
wasserwirtschaftlichen
Praxis.
WWT,
30.
Jg.,
H.
12,
s.

41 3 - 4 1 4 .
Cohon, J . L . ; Marks, D.H.
(1975):
A
review
and
evaluation
of
mu 1 t io b j e c t ive
programming
techniques.
Water
Resources.
Res.
1 1 , H.2.
G.;
Boehme,
J.
(1980):
Dietz,
E r g e b n i s s e aus d e r E r a r b e i t u n g
und
Anwendung
von
Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodellen
(LBM).
WWT, 30.
Jg., H.
6, S.
183- 1 8 5 .
Durbin,
E.P.;
Kroenke,
D .M.
(1967) :The
Out-of - K i 1 t e r
Algorithm:
a primer.
Rand Co.,
Memorandum RM-5472-PR.
u.a.
(1980):
Angewandte
Dyck, S .
Hydrologie,
Teil
1 und 2 .
2.
Auflage.
Verlag fur
Bauwesen,
Berlin.

F o r n e r , B.; Hartmann,
K.;
Woywodt,
PI.
(1979) :
Mathematisches
fur
die
Model 1
wasserwirtschaftliche
lnvestitionsplanung in Fluss und V e r s o r g u n g s g e b i e t e n .
WWT,
29. Jg., H. 6, S . 204-206.
Krippendorf,
H.;
Gruenewald, U.;
T h i e l e , W.
(1977) : E r a r b e i t u n g
und
Anwendung
e i nes
B e w i r t s c h a f t u n g s m o d e l l s fur das
Flussgebiet
der
Bode.
Mitt.
des IfW B e r l i n , S o n d e r h e f t 2.
Haimes, Y . Y . ;
H a l l , W.A.;
Freedman,
Multiobjective
H.T.
(1975) :
O p t i m i z a t i o n i n Water R e s o u r c e s
Systems.
New Y o r k :
Elsevier
S c i e n t i f i c P u b l i s h i n g Company.

Lehmann, H . ; S c h e t t l e r , G . ;
Hubald,
B i s h e r i ge
C.
(1981) :
aus
der
Ergebnisse
des
Praxissnwendung
Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodells
Mulde
(LBM).
WWT, 31.
Jg., H .
8, S . 260-262.
Major, D.C.
(1977):
Multiobjective
P1 ann i ng.
Water
Resource
Amer i can
D. C. :
Washington,
Geophysical Union.
Palmer,
R.N.,
et
Policy
Analysis
Operation i n the
Bas i n.
Univ.
Techn.
R e p o r t No.

al.
(1979) :
o f Reservoir
Potomac R i v e r
of
Maryland,

59.

H a i t h , D.A.;
Loucks,
D.P.
(1976):
Mu1 t i o b j e c t i v e
Water-Resources
Planning.
In:
Systems Approach
t o Water
Management. E d i t e d b y
A.K.
B i swas
New
York:
McGraw-Hill.

R i e c h e r t , D.; Z i l m , K.-H.;
Ruediger,
A.: Schramm, M.; Rahn, U.; B o r k ,
E.
(1979) :
Erhoehung d e r
Wasserabgabe aus S e e n s p e i c h e r n
irn F l u s s g e b i e t Warnow d u r c h e i n
Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodel.
WWT,
29.
Jg.,
H.
7 , s .
229-232.

Hufschmidt,
M.M.;
Fiering,
M.B.
(1966):
S i m u l a t i o n Techniques
for
D e s i g n o f Water R e s o u r c e s
Systems.
Harvard Univ.
Press,
Cambridge, M a s s a c h u s e t t s .

Schramrn,
M.
(1975) :
Zur
mathemat i schen
D a r s t e l lung
und S i m u l a t i o n des n a t u e r l i c h e n
Durchflussprozesses.
Acta
h y d r o p h y s i c a , Bd.
X I X , H.
2-3.

David,
L.
Keeney, R.L.; Wood, E . F . ;
(1976):
Evaluating T i s t a River
B a s i n Development P l a n s U s i n g
M u l t i a t t r i b u t e U t i l i t y Theory.
I I A S A , CP-76-3,
Laxenburg.

Schramm,
M.
(1981) :
Anwendung
stochastischer
Simulationstechniken
zur
Oberflaechenwasserbewirtschaftung.
S o n d e r h e f t e zum A b s c h l u s s e d e r
I . Phase des I H P , NK I H P d e r DDR,
IfW B e r l i n , H.3.

!( i nd 1 e r ,
J
(1981) :
Optima 1
A l l o c a t i o n o f Water R e s o u r c e s .
Int.
Conference on Hydrology.
1981.
Unesco, P a r i s , Aug.

Kozersk i ,
D.
(1981) :
Rechenprogrammsystern
GRM
als
verallgemeinertes
Langfristbewirtschaftungsmodell.
Tei 1
I:
Vera1 l g e m e i n e r t e
der
Model 1 i e r u n g
Bewirtschaftungsprozesse.
WWT,
H.
11, S.
390-394,
3l.Jg.
Tei 1
II:
Rechentechnische
Realisierung.
WWT,
31.
Jg. ,
H. 1 2 , ' s .
415-419.
Krippendorf,
H.;
S c h r amm ,
M.
Ana 1 y s e
(1 970) :
innerrncnatlicher
Durchflusschwankungen.
WWT, 20.
1 1 , S.
367-375.
Jg., H.

S k i a o , V . ; Mc S p a r r a n , J.E.
Reappraisal o f
Water

(1971):
Supply

G.G.
(1964) :
Osnovy
Svanidze,
r a s c e t a r e g u l i r o v a n i j a recnogo
stoka
metodom
Monte-Carlo
zur
(Berechnungsgrund 1 agen
Regelung
des
Abflusses
in
F.1 u e s s e n
nach
der
Monte-Carlo-Methode),
Tbilissi:
m e c n i e r e b a 1964.

Thomas, H . A . ;
F i e r i n g , H.B.
(1962):
I n Maass e t a l . :
The d e s i g n o f
water
resource
systems.
Cambridge:
Harvard U n i v e r s i t y
Press,

-189-

A.Stochastic

s i m u l a t i o n model o f t h e a v a i l a b l e w a t e r r e s o u r c e s

Separatestochastic generation o f time series o f hydrological

i n p u t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s (e.g. s e t s o f 100
years records o f monthly r i v e r s discharges)

B . D e t e r m i n i s t i c water'management model ( r e p e a t e d a p p l i c a t i o n f o r
f o r p l a n n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e s of i n t e r e s t )

JI

D e t a i l e d b a l a n c i n g of t h e a v a i l a b l e
w a t e r r e s o u r c e s (as p r e - g e n e r a t e d )
w i t h w a t e r demands and o t h e r r e q u i r e m e n t s , and a l l o c a t i o n o f w a t e r
resources from r e s e r v o i r s according
t o g i v e n c o n t r o l s t r a t e g i e s , user
p r i o r i t i e s , etc.

w a t e r demand,
flood protection,
minimum r i v e r
discharge, etc.

month 1 y

time step

C.

F i n a l s t a t i s t i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , e v a l u a t i o n and p r i n t i n g
o f t h e s i m u l a t i o n r e s u l t s f o r each p l a n n i n g a l t e r n a t i v e

A n a l y s i s o f t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e comput a t i o n s w i t h t h e d e c i s i o n makers
J

S e t u p o f new a l t e r n a t i v e s o f w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s management and a l l o c a t i o n
( i f required) i n coordination w i t h
t h e w a t e r u s e r s , d e c i s i o n makers e t c .
( i n c l u d i n g new system e l e m e n t s ,
modification of control strategies,
t e c h n o l o g i e s o f w a t e r use, e t c .

for a d d i t i o n a l
model r u n s

D e c i s i o n m a k i n g on t h e optimum s y s t e m d e s i g n , w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s a l l o c a t i o n and management

Fig.

M a i n components o f t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s o f w a t e r
r e s o u r c e s system d e s i g n and management i n r i v e r
b a s i n s b y means o f s i m u l a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s .

-190-

2.:

Fig.

A.

I m p o r t a n t Elements i n Water R e s o u r c e s
Systems P a n n i n g and Management

New w a t e r s t r u c ur es

Reservoirs
Water t r a n s f e r c h a n n e l s and p i p e s
Flood control structures
Water t r e a t m e n t p l a n t s
etc.

B . Changes o f c o n t r o l s t r a t e g i e s f o r t h e e x i s t i n g and f o r
planned water s t r u c t u r e s

- C o n t r o l o f r e s e r v o i r s , water uses,
water transfers, e t c .
I n s t a l l a t i o n o f more e f f i c i e n t r e a l - t i m e
f o r e c a s t i n g and c o n t r o l s y s t e m s

C.

A l t e r n a t i v e t e c h n o l o g i e s o f water use

D.

in industry
for irrigation
f o r p u b l i c , e n v i r o n m e n t a l and o t h e r
purposes

A l t e r n a t i v e a l l o c a t i o n of water resources i n
regard o f

priorities

- economical a s p e c t s
- s o c i a l , e n v i r o n m e n t a l and o t h e r a s p e c t s

-191-

P 7.7

L I

Fig. 3

representation o f CI r i v e r
network with buhnce points (P), users [ N )
and reservoirs (S)
Schematic

-192-

\
\

95

90

-220 000

260000 280000 (m3/d)

240000

Drinking wdep supply

(hmJ)

Flood confrol volume

Fig.4

Reliability of drinking wafer supply Rs and

possible flood dQmages in dependence
of the
a) amount of drinking wcrrep supply
b) flood control volume

-193-

i
74

72

C: reduced release
before ond after fhe
peok Flow period (0.7)

release
N

Fig.5

Longferrn f l o o d risk below Jhe Saole

reservoir system for U definite flood
con trot volume [cur ve A )

-194-

100

-- 7
si m ula fed :
x 2
a

derived from observafions

50

no reservoir
one reservoli,
(uncontrolled ouf ief )

20

70

.i

recurrence inferval (years)

IO

AI7

90

II

50

70

exceedence

Fig. 6

20
I

1I

probability (%)

Probobill' fy distribution. func flons o f flaod

peak flow ai U river cross-section (75km2)
for uncontrolled and con f r olled condiflbns.

-195-

T a b l e 1: D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e c o n t i y u r a t i o n
o f t h e r i v e r system i n f i g . 3 .
Balance
point
(external
notation)
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P

1.1
1.21
1.3
1.7
1.75
1.8
2.1
2.2
3.1
3.3
4.2

Internal
Index
K

1
2
3
4

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Network
conf i y u r a t i o n
vector
NEXT/\</
2
3
4

5
6
-999
U

5
10
4
10

T a b l e 2 : D e s c r i p t i o n o f some u s e r s
i n the r i v e r basin of fig.

3.

x ) Remark: S m a l l e r p r e f e r e n c e number Z
means h i g h e r p r i o r i t y

-.-.

rl

r4

... 000000

00
00

dd

0
rl

-196-

rl

o * * *

00
00

dd