z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Cost-effectiveness analysis of different watershed management scenarios developed by simulation–optimization model
Author(s) -
Hamzeh Noor,
Somayeh Fazli,
Mohammad Rostami,
Ali Bagherian Kalat
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
water science and technology water supply
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.318
H-Index - 39
eISSN - 1607-0798
pISSN - 1606-9749
DOI - 10.2166/ws.2017.029
Subject(s) - sorting , watershed , multi objective optimization , soil and water assessment tool , pareto principle , sediment , environmental science , watershed management , reduction (mathematics) , computer science , mathematical optimization , mathematics , geology , drainage basin , paleontology , geometry , cartography , machine learning , streamflow , programming language , geography
The effort to control sediment yield at watershed scale is an ongoing challenge that needs to take into account trade-offs between two conflicting objective functions, i.e. economic and hydrologic criteria. Therefore, researchers have coupled hydrologic and multi-objective optimization models to find Pareto-optimal solutions. However, very limited studies have been conducted to analyse the cost-effectiveness (C/E) of scenarios obtained in the Pareto-front optimal. This could provide new information leading to effective watershed management. Therefore, in the present study, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) was used to simulate sediment yield under different combinations of best management practices (BMPs) and was coupled with the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II). The model attends to providing the Pareto-optimal solutions by minimizing the costs of BMPs and maximizing sediment reduction. The results of the application of the cost-effective optimization model in Mehran watershed, Iran, showed that the solutions in the Pareto-optimal front reduce sediment yield between 2% and 40.5% from baseline at costs of between $6,500 and $72,100, respectively. Finally, comparison of four sediment reduction solutions (i.e. 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40%) showed that the total cost and C/E ratio of solutions increased as the sediment reduction criteria increased.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom