MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6980371538

Calculating Sustainability Indices of Water and Basin to Maintain Sustainability Development (Case Study: Gamasiab Basin Watershed)

2016· article· en· W6980371538 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueWater Resources and Sustainability
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSustainabilityWater resourcesStructural basinSustainable developmentWater useDry seasonDrainage basinWet season
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

1-Introduction Loucks (2000) and Margerum (1999) defined the concept of sustainability paradigm for multi-purpose projects to obtain the consent of stakeholders in decision-making process. Accordingly, Chavez and Alipaz (2007) claimed that sustainability of water resources directly depends on the political, life, environmental and hydrological situations, although there are little to integrate them in the same manner. Sullivan and Meigh, (2005) stated that there have been a desire to measure and describe different aspects of indicators of sustainable development of water resources. Kondratyev et al, (2002) and Ioris et al, (2008) believe that the current restrictions on the stability of most aspects are in biophysical methods. Most of mining socio-economic factors are caused by environmental driving forces. Wang and Innes, (2005) used confirmed auditing systems approach of sustainable forest management accompanied by the evaluation of regional sustainable development to test land sustainability and use of water resources in river basins Mine, Foujin in the China . The results show that the basin has little power for sustainable development. 2-Materials and Methods The water sustainability indicators: these indicators include the quantity of water resources and their availability such as: Dry Season Flow by River Basin This indicator was developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) as a part of the Pilot Analysis of Global Ecosystems (PAGE) (WRI, 2000) for the description of water conditions on a river basin level. It considers the temporal variability of water availability that is essential for some places like the regions with rainy and dry seasons. Watersheds with a dry season are the places where less than 2% of the surface runoff is available in the 4 driest months of the year. This indicator is calculated by dividing the volume of runoff during the dry season, i.e. during the four consecutive months with the lowest cumulative runoff, by the population. Water availability index (WAI) Meigh et al. (1999) calculated GWAVA (Global Water AVailability Assessment) model the temporal variability of water availability. The index includes surface water as well as groundwater resources comparing the total amount to the demands of all sectors, i.e. domestic, industrial and agricultural demands. The month with the maximum deficit or minimum surplus respectively is decisive. The index is normalized in the range of –1 to +1. When the index is zero, availability and demands are equal. Vulnerability of Water Systems Gleick (1990) developed this index for watersheds in the United States as part of an assessment of the potential impacts of climate change for water resources and water systems. Watershed Sustainability Index A sustainable and integrated water management need the engagement of all stakeholders. Such water management has demonstrated to be capable of integrating all issues of water resources management (loucks, 2000). Water sustainability indices, namely Water Poverty Index (WPI) are presented by Sullivan (2002), Canadian Water Sustainability Index (CWSI) by the Policy Research Initiative (Policy Research Initiative, 2007) and Watershed Sustainability Index (WSI) by Chaves and Alipaz (2007). All these three indices have the same goal to provide information on current conditions of water resources, provide inputs to decision makers and prioritize water-related issues. 3-Results and Discussion In this study, the combination of indicators, which are directly from output of watershed simulation models, are used. The computation of indicators has been done in excel making three dimensional matrix of scenario- alternative and indicators. Solving these matrix has been done by multi criteria decision making (MCDM). Compromise programing is one of these methods that is used in this study. 4-Conclusion Studying in the Gamasiab watershed, simulated by WEAP model and the compromise programing, showed that in the scenario only Jamishan dam is the option to decrease the losses and increase water efficiency alternative. In the other hand, the decrease losses alternative is the best one in the scenario three dams.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,053
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0020,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,088
Tête enseignante GPT0,462
Écart entre enseignants0,374 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle