Abstract
The paper introduces and applies a methodology to screen investments aimed at reducing water supply risks due to hydrologic failures in headwork systems for municipal use, based on the principles of cost-benefit analysis. As risk includes both the probability of a failure and its effect, the methodology combines a simulation module of the system, fed by a stochastic hydrologic input to reproduce the probability distribution of the failures, with a metric for supply failure damage provided by the price – demand relationship for municipal water. Benefits are assessed as the averted damage compared to a base case without investments. This approach is then combined with the classic discounted cashflow approach of cost – benefit analysis to allow for the dynamics of both water supply and demand due to trends in population growth, individual consumption and, above all, planned reduction of losses in water distribution networks. The methodology is applied to screen a number of different supply-side projects for the headwork system supplying Apulia, in southern Italy featuring both regulated surface and groundwater resources and providing drinking water to over 4,000,000 persons. The procedure allows both ranking of single projects by their economical performances and the economic evaluation of combinations of different projects. The study also aims to assess the impact of the selected time scale, of cross-correlation among production sites, and of the specification of the demand function on projects' economic indicators. Results show that each modelling assumption has a considerable impact on the value of the economic indicators in absolute terms, but ranking of the different projects seems to be less sensitive to such modelling aspects.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arena C, Mazzola MR, Scordo G (2010) A simulation/optimization model for selecting infrastructure alternatives in complex water resources systems. Water Sci Technol—WST 61(12):3050–3060
Chen L, McPhee J, Yeh WW–G (2007) A diversified multiobjective GA for optimizing reservoir rule curves. Adv Water Resour 30:1082–1093
Dalhuisen JM, Florax RJGM, Henri LF, De Groot HLF, Nijkamp P (2003) Price and income elasticities of residential water demand: a meta-analysis. Land Econ 79(2):292–308
Del Treste A, Mazzola MR (1991) Valutazione degli effetti economici indotti dal trasferimento di risorse idriche nell’ambito di un sistema ad usi multipli. Proceedings of the Conference “Grandi trasferimenti d’acqua”, Associazione Idrotecnica Italiana, Cortina D’Ampezzo, Italy
Draper JA, Lund RJ (2004) Optimal hedging and carryover storage value. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 130(1):83–87
Espey M, Espey J, Shaw W (1997) Price elasticity of residential demand for water: a meta analysis. Water Resour Res 33(6):1369–1374
Griffin RC (2006) Water Resources Economics – The analysis of scarcity, policies, and projects. MIT Press, Cambridge
Harou JJ, Pulido-Velazquez M, Rosenberg DE, Medellin-Azuara J, Lund JR, Howitt RE (2009) Hydro-economic models: concepts, design, applications, and future prospects. J Hydrol 375(3–4):627–643
Hashimoto T, Stedinger J, Loucks DP (1982) Reliability, resilience and vulnerability criteria for water resource system performance evaluation. Water Resour Res 18(1):14–20
Huang W–C, Yuan L-C, Lee CM (2002) Linking genetic algorithms with stochastic programming to the long-term operation of a multireservoir system. Water Resour Res. doi:10.1029/2001WR001122
Jain SK, Singh VP (2003) Water resources systems planning and management. Developments in water science 51, Elsevier
Jenkins MW, Lund JR, Howitt RE (2003) Using economic loss functions to value urban water scarcity in California. J AWWA 95(2):58–70
Jenkins MW, Lund JR, Howitt RE, Draper AJ, Msangi SM, Tanaka SK, Ritzema RS, Marques GF (2004) Optimization of California’s water supply system: results and insights. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 130(4):271–280
Klemeš V (1977) Value of information in reservoir optimization. Water Resour Res 13(5):837–850. doi:10.1029/WR013i005p00837
European Union REGIO (2008) Guide to Cost –Benefit Analysis of Investment Project
Koutsoyiannis D, Economou A (2003) Evaluation of the parameterization-simulation-optimization approach for the control of reservoir systems. Water Resour Res. doi:10.1029/2003WR002148
Labadie JW (2004) Optimal operation of multi-reservoir systems: state of the art review. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 130(2):93–111
Loucks DP, Van Beek E (2005) Water Resorces Systems Planning and Management – An Introduction to Methods, Models and Applications. UNESCO
Matalas NC, Wallis JR (1976) Generation of synthetic flow sequences. In: Biswas AK (ed) Systems approach to water management. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 54–79
Matrosov ES, Padula S, Harou JJ (2013) Selecting portfolios of water supply and demand management strategies under uncertainty—contrasting economic optimisation and ‘robust decision making’ approaches. Water Resour Manag 27(4):1123–1148
Momtahen S, Dariane A (2009) Optimization of multireservoir systems operation using modified direct search genetic algorithm. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 135(3):141–148
Oliveira R, Loucks DP (1997) Operating rules for multireservoir system. Water Resour Res 33(4):839–852
Preziosi E, Del Bon A, Romano E, Petrangeli AB, Casadei S (2013) Vulnerability to drought of a complex water supply system. The Upper Tiber Basin Case Study (Central Italy). Water Resour Manag 27(13):4655–4678
Pulido-Velazquez M, Jenkins W, Lund J (2004) Economic values for conjunctive use and water banking in southern California. Water Resour Res. doi:10.1029/2003WR002626
Rani D, Moreira M (2010) A survey and potential application in reservoir systems operation. Water Resour Manag 24(6):1107–1138
Razavi Toosi SL, Samani JMV (2012) Evaluating water transfer projects using Analytic Network Process (ANP). Water Resour Manag 26(7):1999–2014
Rosenberg DE, Lund J (2009) Modeling integrated decisions for a municipal water system with recourse and uncertainties: Amman, Jordan. Water Resour Manag 23(1):85–115
Salas J (1993) Analysis and modelling of hydrologic time series. In: Maidment DR (ed) Handbook of hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 1–72
Sulis A, Sechi GM (2013) Comparison of generic simulation models for water resource systems. Environ Model Softw 40:214–225
Tsakiris G (2007) Practical application of risk and hazard concepts in proactive planning. Eur Water 19(20):47–56
Tu M-Y, Hsu N-S, Tsai FT-C, Yeh WW-G (2008) Optimization of hedging rules for reservoir operations. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 134(1):3–13
Watkins WD Jr, McKinney DC (1998) Decomposition methods for water resources optimization models with fixed costs. Adv Water Resour 21:283–295
Wenquan G, Dongguo S, Yufang J (2012) Risk evaluation of water shortage in source area of middle route project for South-to-North water transfer in China. Water Resour Manag 26(12):3479–3493
You J-Y, Cai X (2008) Hedging rule for reservoir operations: 1. A theoretical analysis. Water Resour Res. doi:10.1029/2006WR005481
Yang C-C, Chang L-C, Yeh C-H, Chen C-S (2007) Multiobjective planning of surface water resources by multiobjective genetic algorithm with constrained differential dynamic programming. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 133(6):499–508
Acknowledgments
This study has been developed in the framework of a convention between the Autorità di Bacino della Puglia (River Basin Authority of Apulia - AdBP) and the Department of Civil, Environmental, Aerospatial and Materials Engineering (DICAM) of Palermo University, Italy. The authors gratefully thank prof. Antonio Di Santo and Eng. Claudia Campana from the AdBP for providing the valuable data and information necessary to complete the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arena, C., Cannarozzo, M. & Mazzola, M.R. Screening Investments to Reduce the Risk of Hydrologic Failures in the Headwork System Supplying Apulia (Italy) – Role of Economic Evaluation and Operation Hydrology. Water Resour Manage 28, 1251–1275 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0539-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-014-0539-9