DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT:

NILE BASIN APPLICATIONS AND FURTHER NEEDS

Aris P. Georgakakos

Professor and Director, Georgia Water Resources Institute,

Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0355, USA

Abstract: This article discusses a decision support system (DSS) for

water resources planning and management in the Nile Basin. This DSS
represents the outgrowth of DSS applications to several world regions
(US, South America, Europe, Middle East, China, and Africa) and is
designed to address and support multiple water uses, multiple
disciplines, and multiple decision makers. The article advocates that the
design, development, and implementation of effective decision support
systems must bring together disciplines, people, and institutions
necessary to address todays complex water resources challenges.

Keywords: Decision support, system analysis, integrated, forecast,

regulation multi-objective, multi-dimensional, uncertainty.

1. INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IWRM) PROCESSES

IWRM is the process of formulating and implementing shared vision planning and management
strategies for sustainable water resources utilization with due consideration of all spatial and
temporal interdependencies among natural processes and water uses (Georgakakos, 2006).

The IWRM process is conceptualized in Figure 1. The knowledge to support planning and
management decisions resides in various disciplines including climatology, meteorology,
hydrology, ecology, environmental science, agro-science, water resources engineering, systems
analysis, socio-economics, law, public health, and public policy. Public policy actors (such as
politicians, judges, government agencies, financial institutions, Non-Governmental
Organizations, citizen groups, industries, and the general public) are often in a position to make
critical decisions that reflect societys shared vision for water resources utilization. Public policy
actors develop consensus and decide on shared vision strategies based on information generated
and communicated by Decision Support Systems (DSS) and associated processes. Thus, the
role of DSS is to leverage current scientific and technological advances to develop and evaluate
specific policy options for possible adoption by the IWRM process. DSSs are developed and used
by research institutions, government agencies, consultants, and the information technology
industry.

By its nature, IWRM is a process where information, technology, natural processes, water uses,
societal preferences, institutions, and policy actors are subject to gradual or rapid change. To
keep current, IWRM should include a self-assessment and improvement mechanism. This
mechanism is indicated by dashed arrows in Figure 1 and starts with monitoring and evaluating
the impacts of decisions made. These evaluations identify the need for improvements pertaining
to the effectiveness of the institutional set-up, the quality and completeness of the information
generated by decision support systems and processes, and the validity and sufficiency of the
current scientific knowledge base.

IWRM processes can lead to great successes just as they can cause costly failures. In a world
where water disputes are on the rise and the delay between science and technology advances and
their consideration by management practices widens, IWRM phases important challenges:
Lack of integrative tools to support planning and management decisions;
Segmentation of institutions responsible for water resources planning and management;
Limited participation of stakeholders in decision making processes;
Lack of disinterested self-assessment and improvement mechanisms;
Continuing specialization of science and engineering education at the expense of
interdisciplinary training.

Specifically on tools, lack of integration is common with respect to disciplines (water resources,
agriculture, environmental science, ecology, energy, public health, socio-economics, etc.) as well
as with respect to decision levels (assessment, planning, and operational management). Current
DSS tools are narrowly focused, developed by overspecialized professionals, working for
institutions operating in silo mode. Thus, lack of integration undermines the effectiveness of
tools, people, and institutions and is a major challenge of IWRM processes.

However, challenges create opportunities, and the design, development, and use of DSS is an
excellent opportunity that can potentially thread together a broad range of disciplines, people, and
institutions to address the complex IWRM challenges.

2
 Integrated Water Resources Management Process

Scientific Disciplines
Climatology, Meteorology, Hydrology, Ecology, Environmental Science, Water Resources, Agro-science,
Engineering, Systems Analysis, Sociology, Economics, Public Health, Law, Policy Science,

Knowledge Need for Scientific Advancement

Decision Support Systems/Processes

Interaction
Information Systems Methodologies, Models

Research Institutions, Government Agencies, Consultants, Information Technology Industry

Need for DSS & Technological

Policy Options, Implications
Advancement

Public Policy Actors

Politicians, Judges, Government Agencies, Financial Institutions, NGOs, Citizen Groups, Industries,
General Public,

Shared Vision Strategies Need for Institutional Improvement

Planning and Management Decisions

Figure 1: DSS Role in Water Management: From Science to Public Policy

3
 2. NEED FOR DECISION SUPPORT IN THE NILE BASIN

The Nile River Basin (Figure 2) covers about 10% of the African continent and is spread over ten
countries (Burundi, Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and
Rwanda). Almost all Nile water is generated on an area covering 20 percent of the basin, while
the remainder is in arid or semi-arid regions. Egypt and Sudan are almost totally dependent on
the Nile for their water uses. Most other Nile countries are close to water stress, if not already
below the water scarcity threshold of 1000 m3 of water per inhabitant per year. Water stress is
compounded by rapid population growth, occurring at nearly twice the average global rate.
Hence severe water scarcity conditions are looming over most Nile countries. Nile Basin
economies are heavily dependent on agriculture which accounts for more than half of the gross
domestic product and employs more than 80% of the workforce. However, lack of water supply
infrastructure, marked climate variability, and poor cultivation practices have seriously restrained,
if not completely halted, economic growth.

These complex challenges are at the forefront of an unfolding initiative by the Nile Basin nations
to set forth equitable and lasting water development and utilization agreements. The goal of the
Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is poverty alleviation and sustainable economic growth. Thus, water
sharing is intended to facilitate the creation of efficient markets for food and energy and stimulate
environmentally-sound industrial and economic growth. However, effective policy dialogue
requires that the countries assess and weigh the benefits and impacts of various water
development and management strategies accrued to themselves and other Nile partners. Pre-
requisite elements in this process are the existence of an institutional cooperative framework,
information and modelling systems, and the technical expertise to use them.

Thus, Nile Basin decision making needs span a wide range of

(i) sectors (water supply, agriculture, energy, environment, ecology, public health, socio-
economics, etc.);
(ii) geographic scales (basin wide, regional, national, and local);
(iii) temporal scales (decadal, annual, seasonal, weekly, daily, and sub-daily);
(iv) decision makers (Nile Basin Ministers; regional multi-country organizations such as those
associated with the eastern and southern Nile regions; national water, agriculture,
environmental and energy agencies; and local communities); and
(v) decisions (basin infrastructure development projects, water sharing compacts, regional
and national management of hydro-systems, and community and catchment scale
projects).

The development of decision support systems that can address these needs is a formidable, yet
imperative, challenge. The next section describes a multi-year and on-going effort to develop a
prototype such system.

4
 Mediterranean Sea
Alexandria Port Said
Idfina Zifta
Rosetta Damietta
Delta Brg.
Cairo Aqaba

Asyut
EGYPT Nag Hammadi

Isna
Toshka Depression
Aswan

Lake Nasser

Dongola
Red Sea
Main Nile Merowe
Atbara

Khartoum
Gebel El Aulia Dam
ERITREA
Khashm El Girba
SUDAN
Sennar

White Nile Roseires

Diem
La ke Ta na

Border
Melut Mabil
Bahr El Chazal Karadobi
Malakal Mendaia
Lol Blue Nile
Sobat Baro
Jur Sudd
Akobo
Pibor
Tonj ETHIOPIA
Bor
Mongala

Nimule Lake Rudolph

Pakwatch
Lake Albert
DRC Lake Kyoga KENYA
Owen Falls
UGANDA
Lake Edward
Equator Lake
Victoria
Lake Kivu RU AND A

BU RUN DI

TANZANIA

Figure 2: The Nile

5
 3. THE NILE DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM

The Nile Decision Support System (Nile DST) is the outgrowth of several projects implemented
in the course of the last 10 years. These were collaborative efforts of the Georgia Water
Resources Institute at Georgia Tech, the Nile Governments and their agencies, and various
international organizations. The Nile DST includes planning and operational components
developed for and used by individual countries as well as by regional and basin wide
organizations. A planning level DSS, named Nile Decision Support Tool (Nile DST), was
developed for all countries of the Nile under the auspices of the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO) with support from the Italian Government. Operational
management DSSs have been developed for and are currently used in Uganda (Lake Victoria
DST) under World Bank support, and Egypt (High Aswan Dam DSS) under support from the US
Agency for International Development and the Government of the Netherlands. While these
DSSs were built under separate initiatives, they share a consistent modeling framework and are
designed as components of an integrated system. Following is a brief description of these
systems, their functionality, and their intended purpose.

3.1 Basin Wide Planning DSS: The Nile DST

The Nile DST includes a database, a set of models (for river simulation and management,
agricultural planning, hydrologic modeling, and remote sensing), and a user-data-model interface.
These components are described next, with more attention placed on the Nile DST planning
modules.

3.1.1 Database and Interface

The Nile DST database is an object-oriented, database structure developed to (1) house all types
of data (existing as well as future) required by a comprehensive water resources decision support
system and (2) to optimize data entry, access, visualization, and analysis. To support the process
of water resources planning and management, the data base is designed with the ability to accept
new data and is equipped with tools to visualize and analyze geo-referenced and time series data
in efficient and meaningful ways. The database is comprised of several national databases and is
of considerable size. Each Nile country has painstakingly compiled station data with
measurements of more than 30 hydro-climatic parameters, including remotely sensed data that
covers the entire basin. All together, this data represents nearly 37 GB of information.

3.1.2 River and Reservoir Simulation and Management

The Nile DST River Simulation and Management system aims at simulating the Nile response
under different hydrologic, development, and management scenarios. Thus, its overriding
purpose is to objectively assess the benefits and tradeoffs associated with various water
development, sharing, and management strategies that may interest the Nile Basin partners
individually or as an interdependent community of nations. Tradeoffs exist among water uses in
the same country and across the Nile countries. The river basin planning and management Nile
DST component has several unique features:

This module includes extensive data in five major categories: (a) River network configuration,
(b) river hydrology, (c) existing and planned hydro facilities, (d) water use, and (e) reservoir/lake
regulation rules. Data can be viewed, added, or modified as necessary through a user-friendly
interface. The actual river system is represented by a network of river nodes, reaches, and

6
reservoirs, each with its own attributes. River nodes represent locations of local inflow and/or
water withdrawals and returns. River reaches represent physical river segments and their water
transport characteristics. Reservoirs represent man-made or natural lakes that may support
various water uses including water supply, flood control, drought management, hydropower, and
wetland protection, among others.

Models: This module integrates streamflow forecasting, river and reservoir simulation, and
reservoir management. Ten-day streamflow forecasts are generated at key basin nodes including
Lakes Victoria, Kyoga, and Albert, Torrents, Bahr el Ghazal, Sobat, the Blue Nile, Dinder,
Rahad, and Atbara. The forecasts have the form of equally likely realizations reflecting historical
streamflow characteristics such as seasonal and long-term variability. Streamflow forecasts are
generated by the hydrologic watershed models, or via statistical procedures where hydrologic
models are unavailable.

The river and reservoir routing models simulate the movement of water through the river
reaches and quantify transmission losses and time lags. The routing models are based on
statistical or physically-based relationships (depending on available information) and incorporate
model error characterizations. Reservoir and lake outflow through hydropower facilities and
spillways is modeled with sufficient detail for use in operational applications.

The purpose of reservoir management is to determine release sequences from each system
reservoir such that sub-basin and basin-wide objectives are met as best as possible. System
objectives include meeting water supply targets and avoiding water shortages, minimizing losses,
maintaining land use patterns (Sudd), regulating river flows, avoiding spillage, and generating as
much firm and average energy as possible. The task of the reservoir control module is
complicated by the system size, non-linear response, and intrinsic uncertainties. The optimization
process is based on the Extended Linear Quadratic Gaussian (ELQG) control method (developed
by Georgakakos and associates, 1987 through present), a trajectory iteration optimization
algorithm suitable for multidimensional, dynamic, and uncertain systems.

Applications: The Nile-DST river simulation and management model can be used to provide
answers to various important questions. Typical applications are listed below:

Value of various regulation, hydro-power, and irrigation projects along the White, Blue, and
Main Nile branches; Such assessments could quantify the incremental benefits from
individual development projects as well as the combined benefits from various project
configurations;
Implications of reservoir regulation policies for local, upstream, and downstream riparians;
Marginal value (gain or loss) of irrigation with respect to hydropower at various basin
locations;
Irrigation versus hydropower tradeoffs for each nation, region, and the entire basin;
Impacts of flow regulation on wetlands.

The Nile-DST utilizes several assessment criteria of interest to the Nile Basin nations. These
criteria include:

(i) severity and frequency of shortages with respect to user-specified water supply targets;
(ii) water withdrawals and losses over user-selected regions and times of the year;
(iii) reservoir and lake level drawdown and spillage statistics;
(iv) in-stream flow availability at user-selected river nodes and reaches;

7
(v) flood and drought severity and frequency;
(vi) annual and firm energy generation statistics;
(vii) seasonal and permanent extent of wetlands.

Figure 3 presents an assessment of the flow and hydropower impacts of two development
scenarios in the Blue Nile Basin. The first scenario (blue line) is the baseline of current
conditions. The second scenario (green line) assumes that 4 large hydropower projects have been
built in Ethiopia and are operated using dynamic inflow forecasts and multi-reservoir control
methods. The results show that flow changes can be significant with benefits both at the high and
the low ends (reduction of excessive floods as well as low flow augmentation). Furthermore,
energy generation in Ethiopia would increase very substantially and would potentially benefit not
only Ethiopia but also Sudan and Egypt.

The benefit of Ethiopian hydropower development on Sudanese agriculture is shown on Figure 4

which depicts the drought frequency curves for Sudan with and without the Ethiopian projects.
The frequency curves are plotted for different upstream consumptive use scenarioslow,
medium, and highand show that Sudan water supply deficits decrease (both in severity as well
as frequency) under the Ethiopian projects. The graphs also show that Sudan deficits would
increase if upstream consumptive use were to increase. The purpose of the policy dialogue is to
analyze such tradeoffs and determine acceptable compromises among benefits and costs accrued
to each Nile riparian.

Lastly, Figure 5 shows the downstream reservoir impacts of Ethiopian hydropower development.
The graphs depict the level sequences (1912 to 1977) of Lake Victoria, Lake Albert, Karadobi
(planned Ethiopian reservoir), and Lake Nasser. The graphs show that Ethiopian storage would
attenuate the Blue Nile floods and considerably reduce the seasonal Lake Nasser fluctuation.
Other assessments (not shown) indicate that coordinated management of the Ethiopian, Sudanese,
and Egyptian reservoirs could reduce evaporation losses without compromising the reliability of
water supply.

3.1.3. Agricultural Planning

Agriculture is the main source of income for a large part of the Nile Basin population.
Agricultural products are also an important source of foreign currency, as commodities like
coffee, cotton, and sugarcane are exported in large quantities and sold on the world market. The
Nile Basin contains many regions of high agricultural potential, some of which are already fully
exploited, while others await development.

Given the importance of agriculture in the basin, decision makers would benefit from reliable
assessments regarding potential crop yield in undeveloped lands, irrigation needs, drought
vulnerability, and the potential tradeoffs between agriculture and other water uses. The purpose
of the agricultural planning model is to address these issues.

Models: The Nile DST contains a comprehensive Agricultural Planning Model (GT-AgroPlan),
which combines state-of-the-science irrigation scheduling and crop yield prediction tools with a
user-friendly graphical interface. Physiologically-based crop models form the agronomic
simulation core of GT-AgroPlan. These models, adapted from the Decision Support System for
Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT; Tsuji et al., 1994), simulate the daily life-processes of crops
using input data for soils, meteorology, and genetics. Currently, GT-AgroPlan includes crop
models for eleven crops (maize, cassava, groundnuts, wheat, rice, sorghum, millet, barley,
potatoes, soybeans, and dry beans), but five additional crops (including sugarcane) have recently

8
 Flow Frequency Curves at Khartoum Annual Energy Comparison

35000 Baseline
900
Ethiopia Power Development
800 Baseline 30000
Ethiopia Power Development
700 25000
Flow (mcm/day)

600
20000

GWH
500
15000
400

300 10000

200 5000
100
0

Congo

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Tanzania

Uganda
Egypt
Burundi

Kenya

Sudan
Rwanda
0
0 20 40 60 80 100

Probability of Exceedence (%)

Figure 3: The graph on the left depicts the flow frequency curves of the Blue Nile at Khartoum
under the baseline (blue) and the Ethiopian hydropower development scenarios (green). The
graph on the right compares annual average energy generation under the same two scenarios.
From left to right, the bars correspond to generation in Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan, and the Lake
Victoria Countries.

Sce nario I Sce nario IV

Baseline development; Ethiopian hydro dvlpmt;
12 18.5 bcm WS target Current 12 23.5 bcm WS target Current
Low Low
High High
10 10

8 8
Deficits (bcm )

Deficits (bcm )

6 6

4 4

2 2

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Fre que ncy of Exce e dance (%) Fre que ncy of Exce e dance (%)

Figure 4: Sudanese water supply deficit frequency curves under baseline and Ethiopian
hydropower development.

9
 Figure 5: Ethiopian development: Lake Nasser impacts.

been added to the DSSAT and will be incorporated into GT-AgroPlan. The models produce
outputs of yield and total irrigation needs as well as daily time-series of soil moisture and
biophysical parameters.

Applications: GT-AgroPlan can be used to assess the gains from irrigation, spatial distribution of
irrigation needs, regional drought vulnerability, and regional calorie supply. Other potential GT-
AgroPlan applications include investigating the consequences of deficit irrigation relative to
water demand and crop production, assessing various irrigation scheduling scenarios, climate
variability impacts on agriculture, and determining water-efficient and high-calorie crop
combinations.

3.1.4. Other Nile DST Modeling Components

The river simulation and management and agricultural planning modules are the main planning
components of the Nile DST. In addition, the system includes hydrologic and remote sensing
modeling components that are designed to facilitate regional assessments. The hydrologic model
simulates watershed water balance processes (rainfall, evapotranspiration, streamflow, and soil
moisture storage) on weekly, ten-day, or monthly time steps, using a historical analog approach to
determine streamflow from current conditions of rainfall, evapotranspiration, and soil moisture.
The model is also useful in assessing the sufficiency of hydrologic data and support the

10
development of monitoring plans. Figure 6 shows a comparison of observed and simulated flows
of the Nzoia river basin in Kenya, demonstrating good correspondence.

Figure 6: Observed vs. simulated streamflows for Nzoia Basin, Kenya

Rainfall drives the response of the Nile Basin at all spatial and temporal scales. However, in large
portions of the Nile Basin, the raingage network is sparse, and satellite data provide an attractive
alternative. The purpose of the remote sensing module is to combine existing raingage data with
data from operational satellites (currently received by the Nile Basin hydro-meteorological
agencies) to provide reliable rainfall estimates over the Nile sub-basins. This model uses a
combination of Meteosat visible and infrared (VIS/IR) images as well as data from the NASAs
TRMM satellite.

Figure 7 illustrates the value of satellite-based rainfall estimation over Lake Victoria. The top
graphs present rainfall estimates based on raingages (located at the lake shores), while the lower
graphs make use of the GT satellite rainfall estimation scheme. The resulting rainfall
distributions are rather different with the satellite estimates being considerably wetter. The lake
level changes experienced during the same period provide strong evidence of the accuracy of the
satellite estimation procedure.

Further details on the hydrologic and remote sensing modules can be found in the Nile DST
technical project reports.

11
 Figure 7: Rainfall Estimation over Lake Victoria with and without Satellite Information

3.2 Sub Basin Planning and Management DSS: The Lake Victoria DST

The purpose of the Lake Victoria Decision Support Tool (LV DST) is to support the information
needs of the Ugandan water and energy agencies as they assess, plan, and manage Ugandas
water and energy resources. As stated earlier, the principal challenge of decision support tools is
to support decisions that are made by several decision makers, pertain to various temporal and
spatial scales, and concern multiple stakeholder agencies and water uses. The LV DST addresses
this challenge by using a multilayer design concept (Figure 8). This conceptual design includes
several interconnected layers each of which models the system at a particular temporal and spatial
scale, addresses a certain subset of objectives, and involves an appropriate subset of decision
makers and stakeholder agencies. The linkages among and within the layers ensure that (1)
system data, models, and outputs provide an integrative understanding of the system response and
(2) decision maker choices are prioritized and implemented consistently as planning and
management processes evolve.

Specifically, LV DST includes four modeling layers, three of which pertain to operational
planning and management and a fourth to assessments. The operational models address (1)
turbine load dispatching for near real time operations (with an hourly time resolution over a
horizon of one day), (2) short/mid range management (with hourly resolution over a horizon of
one month), and (3) long range planning (with a 10-day resolution over a horizon of one to two

12
years). The LV DST assessment model is designed to evaluate infrastructure development
options, demand scenarios, climate variability and change, and regulation policies.

LV DST is designed to operate sequentially. In a typical application, the long range models are
activated first to consider long range planning issues such as appropriate water conservation
strategies for the upcoming one to two years or downstream versus local impacts. In carrying out
these evaluations, the long range models utilize hydrologic and demand forecasts with a 10 day
resolution. A central part of this analysis is to quantify the tradeoffs which should factor into the
decisions of the planning authorities and other stakeholders. The tradeoffs quantify the benefit-
cost (or impact) relationships among (1) water users and (2) water uses, and delineate the capacity
of the system to meet the various demands placed upon it. Interesting tradeoffs pertain to benefits
and costs that would accrue to the power and water sectors or to upstream and downstream users.
After considering all relevant tradeoffs and other pertinent information, planning authorities and
stakeholders are expected to reach a consensus decision regarding water releases, energy
generation, lake level targets, and acceptable downstream impacts.

The short/mid range models are activated next to consider system operation at finer time scales.
The objectives addressed here are operational rather than planning and include power plant
scheduling, flood control, and environmental flow regulation. This model uses power demand and
price forecasts with an hourly resolution and develops power generation and exchange strategies
that optimize the gains and costs associated with the domestic as well as foreign power markets.
Such policies are revised as new information on lake levels, flow forecasts, power demands, and
power generation and trading tariffs becomes available. The model is constrained by the long
range planning decisions, unless current conditions indicate that a departure is warranted.

The turbine load dispatching model is activated last to determine the hour by hour operations
(e.g., turbine dispatching and flow regulation) that realize all decisions made by the upper LV
DST levels.

In developing the LV DST, particular attention has been placed on ensuring consistency across
modeling layers, both with respect to physical system representations as well as with respect to
decisions made. Consistency with respect to decisions is achieved by constraining lower layers to
stay within the limits established by the upper layers. Thus, the purpose of the lower layers is to
distribute the bulk upper layer decisions (e.g., monthly volumes or energy amounts) at finer
temporal scales (e.g., hourly releases and energy generation) such that the operational system
objectives are met as best as possible. Consistency with respect to system representation is
achieved by (1) utilizing models of increasing resolution (temporally and process-wise) and (2)
using lower level models to derive (off or on line) aggregate performance functions associated
with potential upper layer (bulk) decisions. An example of such an aggregate function is the
relationship of power versus plant discharge that provides optimal plant generation as a function
of reservoir level and total plant discharge. Such functions can be derived by the real time
(turbine dispatching) models by determining the optimal turbine loads corresponding to particular
reservoir level and plant discharge combinations. These functions are derived for each system
plant and are provided to the short/mid range models to ensure that they know the power that
will actually be generated from a particular level of hourly plant release. Similar aggregate
performance functions are derived by each modeling layer for each system use and are
communicated to the upper DSS layers. In this manner, each layer has an accurate and consistent
representation of the benefits and implications of its decisions.

The above-described LV DST modeling layers address planning and management decisions. The
scenario/policy assessment model addresses longer term planning issues such as increasing

13
demands, changing tariffs, infrastructure modification (i.e., construction of additional power
facilities), water sharing compacts and policies, potential hydro-climatic changes, and mitigation
measures. The approach taken in this layer is to simulate and inter-compare the system response
under various inflow, demand, development, and management conditions. Furthermore, the
planning and assessment LV DST modeling layers are fully compatible with the Nile DST river
simulation and management model. This compatibility enables the assessment of lake regulation
impacts to all downstream riparians.

Altogether, LV DST represents a comprehensive modeling framework responsive to the

information needs of the Ugandan water and power agencies at all relevant time scales.

Figures 9 and 10 present typical results of the mid/short and long range LV DST model. Figure 9
investigates if power trading would be possible and gainful for Uganda under the stated
assumptions regarding the existence of power plants, transmission capacity, and tariffs (domestic,
export, and import). The result shows that if Uganda acquires excess power capacity and the
transmission system does not constrain the exchange of power, power trading with the
neighboring countries would benefit the power sector. Figure 10 is a lake level forecast made in
September of 2004 for the upcoming 12 months assuming (1) current system conditions and (2)
that Bujagali, a power facility planned on the Victoria Nile, is operational. A comparison of the
lake level ensembles highlights the importance of Bujagali for power as well as lake
management.

The development of LV DST included extensive environmental, ecological, socio-economic, and

public health assessments. The purpose of the assessments was to establish links between lake
regulation strategies and possible impacts on these sectors. Important such links have indeed
been identified, especially between wetlands and lake regulation. On-going efforts aim in
developing quantitative impact relationships and incorporating them into the LV DST.

14
 Turbine Curves
Turbine Availability Turbine Load Dispatching Model 24-hour Turbine Load
Tail water Curves Dispatching
Head Loss
Hourly/One Day
Functions Hourly Releases
Plant Power
Target Generation
Functions
Exports/Imports
Power Demand
Tariffs (D/E/I) Short/Mid Range Control Model 720-hour Plant Dispatching
Expected Gains/Costs
Lake Levels Hourly/One Month

Energy Functions 10-day Releases

Gains/Costs 10-day Energy

Energy Demand
Hydrologic Forecasts
Lake Levels
Inflow Scenarios
Development Scenarios Scenario/Policy Assessment Model
Water/Energy Demand
Scenarios, Tariffs
Water Sharing Compacts
Long Range Control Model
10 Day/One to Two Years
Water/Energy Sharing
Management Strategies
Policies
Infrastructure Changes
10-Day/Several Decades
Energy/Water Tradeoffs
Upstream/Downstream Impacts
Release/Generation Policies
Assessment of
Development Options
Sharing/Regulation Policies
Mitigation Measures for
Climate and Demand Change

Figure 8: LV DST Design Concept

15
Figure 9: Mid/Short range LV DST model: System loads and generation sequences assuming:
operational status of Nalubaale, Kiira, Bujagali; Agreed Curve Lake Regulation; 100 MW
transmission capacity to Kenya and Tanzania; Import tariff equal to domestic tariff during off
peak hours and equal to export tariff during peak hours; Imports and exports possible,

16
 Figure 10: Long range LV DST model: Impact of Bujagali on lake levels under energy target
driven lake regulation.

3.3 Sub Basin Planning and Management DSS: The High Aswan DSS

The High Aswan Dam DSS (HAD DSS) has structure and functionality similar to the LV DST
and aims at supporting decisions made by the Egyptian Ministry of water and irrigation.
Decisions pertain to reservoir releases for irrigation, energy generation, and flood protection. The
system includes inflow forecasting, reservoir simulation, and various decision/optimization
models pertaining to inter-annual, seasonal, weekly, and hourly time scales.

Figure 11 shows the results of a retrospective study for a five year period (1996 to 2000) during
which the Toshka Spillway operated for the first time. The purpose of the study was to compare
the merits of three alternative release policies. The first (Irrigation Policy) is the traditional
approach of releasing according to the monthly irrigation requirements. The second labeled No
SST applies releases according to the recommendations of the HAD DSS using statistical inflow
forecasts. The third labeled SST is similar to the second except that the forecasts are
conditioned on sea surface temperature information of the El Nino region. The results show that
the adaptive dynamic policies of the HAD DSS manage the reservoir better, avoiding the
excessive spills caused by the irrigation policy. As a result, the energy sector realizes significant
gains (~80 million US dollars over 5 years) by generating more hydropower and limiting the
operation of costly thermal plants. The results also show that sea surface temperature information
improves the accuracy of forecasts and overall system management.

17
18
 Elevation(m)
S
pilla
ge(
b c
m) R
ele
ase(b
cm)

145
150
155
160
165
170
175
180

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
996
010
1 1
996
010
1 19960101

1
996
040
1 1
996
040
1 19960401

1
996
070
1 19960701
SST

1
996
070
1
No SST

1
996
100
1 1
996
100
1 19961001
Irrigation Policy

1
997
010
1 1
997
010
1 19970101

1
997
040
1 1
997
040
1 19970401

1
997
070
1 1
997
070
1 19970701

1
997
100
1 19971001
1
997
100
1
8.54
18.58
49.77

1
998
010
1 19980101
1
998
010
1
Spillage (BCM)

1
998
040
1 19980401
1
998
040
1

19
1
998
070
1 19980701
1
998
070
1
Simulation Statistics (1996 to 2000, 5 years)

1
998
100
1 19981001
1
998
100
1

1
999
010
1

driven lake regulation.

1
999
010
1 19990101
Irrig
Min.
SST
Max.
71085.61
62225.14
72884.77

1
999
040
1 19990401
1
999
040
1
H AD Simulated Spillage Sequence
HAD Simulated Release Sequence
HAD Simulated Elevation Sequence

No SST
Energy (GWH)

1
999
070
1 19990701
1
999
070
1

1
999
100
1 19991001
1
999
100
1

2
000
010
1 20000101
2
000
010
1

2
000
040
1
2
000
040
1 20000401
Irrig
SST

2
000
070
1
Irrig
SST

20000701
1976.82
1747.66
2022.82

2
000
070
1
No SST
No SST

2
000
100
1
2
000
100
1 20001001
Energy Value (MLE)

Figure 11: Long range LV DST model: Impact of Bujagali on lake levels under energy target
 4. THE NILE DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM: FURTHER NEEDS

From a geographic standpoint, the Nile DSS provides basin wide coverage relative to planning,
and partial coverage relative to operational management (Lake Victoria Region including the
Sudd, and Main Nile). To this end, the only outstanding DSS building block is the development
of an operational management model for the Blue Nile, the Sobat, and the Atbara rivers. Such a
model would solidify the DSS structure and functionality and would serve all eastern Nile
countries.

From a disciplinary standpoint, the Nile DSS represents a comprehensive modeling infrastructure
that supports meaningful extensions to various other disciplines. Among them are cost/benefit
assessments for new agricultural and hydropower projects, environmental assessments, public
health warning and intervention systems for water and vector borne diseases, and socio-economic
assessments. The structural integration of the Nile DSS would ensure that these assessments
consider the full impact range, in space as well as time.

Lastly, the greatest challenge in the development and effective use of integrated decision support
systems is the availability of qualified water resources professionals. To varying degrees, this
challenge applies everywhere including the Nile Basin. The answer to this challenge is not to
develop simple DSS tools that address parts of the overall problem and provide simplistic
answers to the complex questions asked by policy makers. Doing so would only trivialize and
discredit the role of DSS and defeat the purpose of addressing water resources challenges in a
holistic manner. Instead, a comprehensive professional training and capacity building program
must be part and parcel of DSS development. Sufficient training, retention of qualified personnel,
continuing education, and long term capacity building must all be part of a general educational
strategy.

Specifically, capacity building is a long term endeavor and requires engaging and focusing the
academic community. While university programs cover many of the areas underlying the above
described DSS, they lack a program extending across and integrating the disciplines of
climatology, meteorology, hydrology, hydraulics, sensor technology, water resources
management, power systems analysis, environmental and ecological assessments, economic
valuation, conflict resolution, public health, and information technology. The key to sustainable
water resources development and management is at the interface of these disciplines. It is thus
opportune for the Nile Basin nations to institute cross disciplinary programs that can provide
future engineers and scientists with a holistic understanding of the IWRM process. It is these
qualified people that will create and use better DSS tools and will invent hopeful and amicable
solutions to the ever-emerging Nile Basin challenges.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work referred to herein has been sponsored by various organizations. Specifically, I am
grateful to FAO, World Bank, US Agency for International Development (AID), the Government
of Italy (Cooperazione), and the Government of The Netherlands for funding and continuing to
support my involvement in various DSS development efforts. Several of my graduate students
and associates contributed to the development of the Nile DSS including Huaming Yao, Kelly
Brumbelow, Carlo De Marchi, Stephen Bourne, Lori Visone, and Amy Tidwell. I am very
fortunate to have the opportunity to teach and learn from such talented people. Many individuals

20
from the Nile Basin Countries have contributed to the DSS tools. I specifically wish to thank the
team of National Modelers from all ten Nile countries that have worked closely with us in
developing and testing the various Nile DST modules. I am equally thankful to the management
and engineers of the Ugandan Directorate of Water Development and Ministry of Energy, as well
as the Egyptian Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation. Their continued interest,
collaboration, and friendship are highly motivating and rewarding. Finally, I am grateful to Mr.
Matthew Maccartney and Mr. Seleshi Bekele of the International Water Management Institute for
inviting me to participate at the Dams and DSS workshop in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

REFERENCES

Brumbelow, K., and A. Georgakakos (2000). An Assessment of Irrigation Needs and Crop Yield
for the United States under Potential Climate Changes. Journal of Geophysical Research
Atmospheres 106(D21), 27383-27406, 2001.

Brumbelow, K. and A. Georgakakos, "Agricultural Planning and Irrigation Management: The

Need for Decision Support, The Climate Report, 1(4), 2-6, 2001.

De Marchi, C., and A. Georgakakos, A satellite-based rainfall estimation method for the Lake
Victoria basin, Remote Sensing and Hydrology 2000, Proceedings of a symposium held at Santa
Fe, New Mexico, USA, April 2000, (IAHS Publ. no. 267, 2001.

Georgakakos, A., and D. Marks D (1987). A New Method for the Real-Time Operation of
Reservoir System, Water Resources Research, 23 (7), 1376-1390

Georgakakos, A., (1989a). Extended Linear Quadratic Gaussian Control for the Real-Time
Operation of Reservoir Systems. Esogbue A. In the book entitled DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING
FOR OPTIMAL WATER RESOURCES SYSTEMS ANALYSIS. 329-360. Prentice Hall
Publishing Company, New Jersey.

Georgakakos, A., (1989b). Extended Linear Quadratic Gaussian (ELQG) control: Further
extensions, Water Resources Research, 25 (2), 191-201.

Georgakakos, A. (1991). Computer-Aided Management of the Southeastern U.S. Reservoir

System. Decision Support Systems, D.P. Loucks, ed., NATO ASI Series, Vol. G 26, 407-428

Georgakakos, A., (1993). Operational tradeoffs in reservoir control. Water Resources Research,
29 (11), 3801-3819

Georgakakos, A., and H. Yao (1995). A Decision Support System for the Equatorial Lakes.
Technical Report No. GIT/CEE-HYDRO-95-7, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Georgia Tech, Atlanta.

Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, and Y. Yu (1995). Control Models for Hydropower System Analysis
and Operation, Technical Report, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia
Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 158.

Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, and Y. Yu (1997a). A Control Model for Dependable Hydropower
Capacity Optimization. Water Resources Research, 33 (10), 2349-2365.

21
Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, and Y. Yu (1997b). Control Models for Hydroelectric Energy
Optimization. Water Resources Research, 33 (10), 2367-2379.

Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, and Y. Yu (1997c). A Control Model for Hydroelectric Energy Value
Optimization. ASCE Journal for Water Resources Planning and Management, 123 (1), 30-38.

Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, M. Mullusky, and K. Georgakakos (1998). Impacts of Climate

Variability on the Operational Forecast and Management of Midwestern Water Resources
Systems. Water Resources Research, 34(4), 799-821, 1998.

Georgakakos, K., N. Graham, and A. Georgakakos, Can forecasts accrue benefits for reservoir
management? The Folsom Lake Case Study, The Climate Report, 1(4), 7-10, 2000.

Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, K. Brumbelow, C. DeMarchi, S. Bourne, and M. Mullusky (2000). The
Lake Victoria Decision Support System, prepared for the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations, Technical Report No. GWRI-2000-1, Georgia Water Resources Institute and
Georgia Tech.

Georgakakos, A., H. Yao, K. Brumbelow, C. DeMarchi, S. Bourne, L Visone, and A. Tidwell

(2003). The Nile Decision Support Tool, prepared for the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations, 6 Technical Reports, Georgia Water Resources Institute and Georgia Tech.

Georgakakos, A., and H. Yao (2000). Climate Change Impacts on Southeastern U.S. Basins, 1,
Hydrology. USGS Open File Report #00-334, July 2000.

Georgakakos, A. (2006). Decision Support Systems for Integrated Water Resources Management
with an Application to the Nile Basin. Book chapter in Topics on System Analysis and
Integrated Water Resources Management, eds. A. Castelletti and R. Soncini-Sessa, Elsevier.

Tsuji, G.Y., G. Uehara, and S. Balas (eds.) (1994). Decision Support System for Agrotechnology
Transfer, Version 3. University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

Yao, H, and A. Georgakakos, "Assessment of Folsom Lake Response to Historical and Potential
Future Climate Scenarios," Journal of Hydrology, 249, 176-196, 2001.

22