An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage

Wei LI, Changchun FENG, Chao DAI, Yongping LI, Chunhui LI, Ming LIU

PDF(604 KB)
PDF(604 KB)
Front. Earth Sci. ›› 2016, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (3) : 419-431. DOI: 10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE

An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Water resources availability has a significant impact on agricultural land-use planning, especially in a water shortage area such as North China. The random nature of available water resources and other uncertainties in an agricultural system present risk for land-use planning and may lead to undesirable decisions or potential economic loss. In this study, an inexact risk management model (IRM) was developed for supporting agricultural land-use planning and risk analysis under water shortage. The IRM model was formulated through incorporating a conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) constraint into an inexact two-stage stochastic programming (ITSP) framework, and could be used to control uncertainties expressed as not only probability distributions but also as discrete intervals. The measure of risk about the second-stage penalty cost was incorporated into the model so that the trade-off between system benefit and extreme expected loss could be analyzed. The developed model was applied to a case study in the Zhangweinan River Basin, a typical agricultural region facing serious water shortage in North China. Solutions of the IRM model showed that the obtained first-stage land-use target values could be used to reflect decision-makers’ opinions on the long-term development plan. The confidence level α and maximum acceptable risk loss β could be used to reflect decision-makers’ preference towards system benefit and risk control. The results indicated that the IRM model was useful for reflecting the decision-makers’ attitudes toward risk aversion and could help seek cost-effective agricultural land-use planning strategies under complex uncertainties.

Keywords

agricultural land-use planning / risk management / CVaR / uncertainty / water shortage

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Wei LI, Changchun FENG, Chao DAI, Yongping LI, Chunhui LI, Ming LIU. An inexact risk management model for agricultural land-use planning under water shortage. Front. Earth Sci., 2016, 10(3): 419‒431 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1

References

[1]
Andersson F, Mausser H, Rosen D, Uryasev S (2001). Credit risk optimization with conditional value-at-risk criterion. Math Program, 89(2): 273–291
CrossRef Google scholar
[2]
Carneiro M C, Ribas G P, Hamacher S (2010). Risk management in the oil supply chain: a CVaR approach. Ind Eng Chem Res, 49(7): 3286–3294
CrossRef Google scholar
[3]
Chang N B, Wen C G, Chen Y L, Yong Y C (1996). A grey fuzzy multi-objective programming approach for the optimal planning of a reservoir watershed, part A: theoretical development. Water Res, 30(10): 2329–2334
CrossRef Google scholar
[4]
DRIZRA (Design and Research Institute of Zhangweinan River Administration) (2008). Management Policy and Operation Regulation Report of Yuecheng Reservoir
[5]
EBCZR (Editorial Board of Chorography of Zhangweinan River) (2003). Chorography of Zhangweinan River. Tianjin: Tianjin Science & Technology Press
[6]
El-Shishiny H (1988). A goal programming model for planning the development of newly reclaimed lands. Agric Syst, 26(4): 245–261
CrossRef Google scholar
[7]
Glen J J, Tipper R (2001). A mathematical programming model for improvement planning in a semi-subsistence farm. Agric Syst, 70(1): 295–317
CrossRef Google scholar
[8]
Guo P, Huang G H, He L (2008). ISMISIP: an inexact stochastic mixed integer linear semi-infinite programming approach for solid waste management and planning under uncertainty. Stochastic Environ Res Risk Assess, 22(6): 759–775
CrossRef Google scholar
[9]
Huang G H (1996). IPWM: an interval parameter water quality management model. Eng Optim, 26(2): 79–103
CrossRef Google scholar
[10]
Huang G H, Baetz B W, Patry G G (1994). Capacity planning for municipal solid waste management systems under uncertainty–a grey fuzzy dynamic programming (GFDP) approach. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 120: 132–156
[11]
Huang G H, Li Y P, Xiao H N, Qin X S (2007). An inexact two-stage quadratic program for water resources planning. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 10(2): 99–105
CrossRef Google scholar
[12]
Huang G H, Loucks D P (2000). An inexact two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Civ Eng Environ Syst, 17(2): 95–118
CrossRef Google scholar
[13]
Huang Y, Chen X, Li Y P, Bao A M, Ma Y G (2012). A simulation-based two-stage interval-stochastic programming model for water resources management in Kaidu-Konqi watershed, China. Journal of Arid Land, 4(4): 390–398
CrossRef Google scholar
[14]
Kira D, Kusy M, Rakita I (1997). A stochastic linear programming approach to hierarchical production planning. J Oper Res Soc, 48(2): 207–211
CrossRef Google scholar
[15]
Li W, Li Y P, Li C H, Huang G H (2010). An inexact two-stage water management model for planning agricultural irrigation under uncertainty. Agric Water Manage, 97(11): 1905–1914
CrossRef Google scholar
[16]
Li Y P, Huang G H (2008). Interval-parameter two-stage stochastic nonlinear programming for water resources management under uncertainty. Water Resour Manage, 22(6): 681–698
CrossRef Google scholar
[17]
Li Y P, Huang G H (2009). Two-stage planning for sustainable water quality management under uncertainty. J Environ Manage, 90(8): 2402–2413
CrossRef Google scholar
[18]
Li Y P, Huang G H, Nie S L (2006). An interval-parameter multi-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Adv Water Resour, 29(5): 776–789
CrossRef Google scholar
[19]
Li Y P, Li W, Huang G H (2012). Two-stage inexact-probabilistic programming model for water quality management. Environ Eng Sci, 29(7): 1–13
[20]
Li Z, Huang G H, Zhang Y M, Li Y P (2013). Inexact two-stage stochastic credibility constrained programming for water quality management. Resour Conserv Recycling, 73: 122–132
CrossRef Google scholar
[21]
Liu Y, Lv X J, Qin X S, Guo H C, Yu Y J, Mao G Z (2007). An integrated GIS-based analysis system for land-use management of lake areas in urban fringe. Landsc Urban Plan, 82(4): 233–246
CrossRef Google scholar
[22]
Lu H W, Huang G H, Zhang Y M, He L (2012). Strategic agricultural land-use planning in response to water-supplier variation in a China’s rural region. Agric Syst, 108: 19–28
CrossRef Google scholar
[23]
Maqsood I, Huang G H, Yeomans J S (2005). An interval-parameter fuzzy two-stage stochastic program for water resources management under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res, 167(1): 208–225
CrossRef Google scholar
[24]
Noyan N (2012). Risk-averse two-stage stochastic programming with an application to disaster management. Comput Oper Res, 39(3): 541–559
CrossRef Google scholar
[25]
Piantadosi J, Metcalfe A V, Howlett P G (2008). Stochastic dynamic programming (SDP) with a conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) criterion for management of storm-water. J Hydrol (Amst), 348(3–4): 320–329
CrossRef Google scholar
[26]
Qin X S, Huang G H, Zeng G M, Chakma A, Huang Y F (2007). An interval-parameter fuzzy nonlinear optimization model for stream water quality management under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res, 180(3): 1331–1357
CrossRef Google scholar
[27]
Raju K S, Kumar D N (1999). Multi-criterion decision making in irrigation planning. Agric Syst, 62(2): 117–129
CrossRef Google scholar
[28]
Rockafellar R T, Uryasev S (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk, 2(3): 21–41
[29]
Rockafellar R T, Uryasev S (2002). Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. J Bank Finance, 26(7): 1443–1471
CrossRef Google scholar
[30]
Russell S O, Campbell P F (1996). Reservoir operating rules with fuzzy programming. J Water Resour Plan Manage, 122(3): 165–170
CrossRef Google scholar
[31]
Shakya K M, Leuschner W A (1990). A multiple objective land use planning model for Nepalese hills farms. Agric Syst, 34(2): 133–149
CrossRef Google scholar
[32]
Shao L G, Qin X S, Xu Y (2011). A conditional value-at-risk based inexact water allocation model. Water Resour Manage, 25(9): 2125–2145
CrossRef Google scholar
[33]
Suo M Q, Li Y P, Huang G H (2011). An inventory-theory-based interval-parameter two-stage stochastic programming model for water resources management. Eng Optim, 43(9): 999–1018
CrossRef Google scholar
[34]
Wagner J M, Shamir U, Marks D H (1994). Containing groundwater contamination: planning models using stochastic programming with recourse. Eur J Oper Res, 77(1): 1–26
CrossRef Google scholar
[35]
Webby R B, Adamson P T, Boland J, Howlett P G, Metcalfe A V, Piantadosi J (2007). The Mekong-applications of value at risk (VaR) and conditional value at risk (CVaR) simulation to the benefits, costs and consequences of water resources development in a large river basin. Ecol Modell, 201(1): 89–96
CrossRef Google scholar
[36]
Xu Y, Qin X S (2010). Agricultural effluent control under uncertainty: an inexact double-sided fuzzy chance constrained model. Adv Water Resour, 33(9): 997–1014
CrossRef Google scholar
[37]
Yamout G M, Hatfield K, Romeijn HE (2007). Comparison of new conditional value-at-risk-based management models for optimal allocation of uncertain water supplies. Water Resources Research, 43(7): W07430

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the Special Scientific Research Fund of Ministry of Land and Resources Public Welfare Profession of China (Grant No. 201211023-04). The authors are grateful to the editors and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions.
Supplementary materialƒis available in the online version of this article at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11707-015-0544-1 and is accessible for authorized users.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2015 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(604 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/