Your search found 5 records
1 Haie, N.; Irwin, R. W. 1988. Diagnostic expert systems for land drainage decisions. Irrigation and Drainage Systems, 2(2):139-146.
(Location: IWMI-HQ Call no: PER Record No: H03692)
2 Vrba, J.; Hirata, R.; Girman, J.; Haie, N.; Lipponen, A.; Neupane, B.; Shah, Tushaar; Wallin, B. 2007. Groundwater resources sustainability indicators. In Ragone, S. (Ed.). The Global Importance of Groundwater in the 21st Century: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Groundwater Sustainability, Alicante, Spain, 24-27 January 2006. Westerville, OH, USA: National Groundwater Association. pp.129-138.
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: 333.9104 G000 RAG Record No: H040482)
3 Haie, N.; Keller, A. A. 2012. Macro, meso, and micro-efficiencies in water resources management: a new framework using water balance. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 48(2):235-243. [doi: https://doi.org/10.1111 / j.1752-1688.2011.00611.x]
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H044976)
One of the most important performance indicators for water resources systems (WRSs) management is efficiency. Here, water balance, based on mass conservation, is utilized to systemically develop three levels of composite efficiency indicators for a WRS, which are configurable based on two types of water totals: total inflow and total consumption (outflow that effectively is not available for reuse). The indices characterize hydrology of an area by including in their formulations the flow dynamics at three integrated levels. Furthermore, the usefulness of water is incorporated into the indicators by defining two weights: one for quality, and the other for beneficial attributes of water use. Usefulness Criterion is the product of quality and beneficial weights, emphasizing the equal significance of the two dimensions. Both of these weights depend on the system itself and the priorities of the supervising organization, which also are shaped by the objectives and values of the given society. These concepts lead to the definition of Macro, Meso, and Micro-Efficiencies, which form a set of integrated indicators that explicitly promotes stakeholder involvement in evaluation and design of WRSs. Macro, Meso, and Micro-Efficiencies should be maximized for both water totals, which is an integrated prerequisite for sustainability and is less promoted by competing stakeholders. To demonstrate this new framework, it is applied to published data for urban and agricultural cases and some results are explained.
4 Haie, N.; Freitas, M. R.; Pereira, J. C. 2018. Integrating water footprint and sefficiency: overcoming water footprint criticisms and improving decision making. Water Alternatives, 11(3):933-956.
Water footprint ; Virtual water ; Water resources ; Water management ; International trade ; Strategies ; Decision making ; Water use efficiency ; Sustainability ; Water policy ; Water quality ; Frameworks ; Performance indexes ; Economic value
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H048992)
http://www.water-alternatives.org/index.php/alldoc/articles/vol11/v11issue3/471-a11-3-24/file
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H048992.pdf
https://vlibrary.iwmi.org/pdf/H048992.pdf
(1.30 MB) (1.30 MB)
The Water Footprint Network (WFN) methodology has emerged as a major framework of/for policy analysis as water problems increase. Being addressed by a growing body of literature, water footprint (WF) accounting has advanced substantially in recent years, whereas its sustainability assessment has lagged behind. For this and other reasons, the suitability of WF in guiding water management and planning has been criticised. Simultaneously, water efficiency has gone through much discussion and a new framework called 'sefficiency' (sustainable efficiency) has been presented. It uses a universal law (water balance) to develop systemic and comprehensive performance indicators, integrating water quantity, pollution and value to reveal their trade-offs in multi-level governance with climate descriptors and stakeholder enablers. This article revisits WF criticisms in six categories and advances the sustainability assessment phase of the WFN framework via sefficiency. Starting from, and critically reviewing, a two-country example presented by Dennis Wichelns, we illustrate, through nine (3x3) scenarios, real possibilities of integrating WF and sefficiency. The results reveal that economic and/or WF perspectives alone are insufficient to improve water decision-making processes, not necessarily guaranteeing an increase in the performance of the full system. Consequently, policy makers should be doubly careful about, for example, WF reductions, if sefficiency also decreases.
5 Ahmad, M. T.; Haie, N.; Goncalves, J. M.; Pinho, J.; Yen, H.; Yakubu, M. L.; Mohammed, M. U.; Suleimana, A. 2024. Performance assessment and indicators for agricultural water management-a review. Water and Environment Journal, 20p. (Online first) [doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/wej.12913]
Agricultural water management ; Indicators ; Performance assessment ; Irrigation management ; Irrigation systems ; Water productivity ; Water supply ; Evapotranspiration ; Sustainability ; Case studies
(Location: IWMI HQ Call no: e-copy only Record No: H052743)
(2.59 MB)
The complexity of irrigation systems and the need to adapt them to uncertainties requires developing approaches to synthesize their performances. This paper reviews performance assessment and indicators for agricultural water systems. It is aimed at finding various methods and indices used for irrigation performance assessment and standard classes for their characterization. The global application of the metrics was also documented. Adopting a systematic review approach, peer-reviewed journal articles published in the English language in the last two decades (1 March 2001 to 31 December 2020) were surveyed. Case studies were presented demonstrating the application of the indicators. The study revealed a lack of standardization and the use of a wide range of indicators among others, and recommended representing certain indicators as single. However, this review considered one indicator as the best. Suggestions for further studies were made.
Powered by DB/Text WebPublisher, from
