Abstract
In developing countries, water distribution is a service that has limited resources for its expansion and modernization. Besides this problem, some regions suffer shortages of water. Thus, this resource is under-supplied to many communities. For this kind of situation, the planning of maintenance activities becomes even more important in order to reduce downtime due to system failures. Generally, more than one person may be involved in such kinds of decision-making processes. Thus, methods to aid group decision-making play an important role in finding a solution that captures different points of view. Therefore, this paper puts forward an approach for analyzing the preferences of water supply maintenance managers and includes the customer’s perspective in the decision process. The evaluation criteria are set in terms of seeking to establish the optimal interval for preventive maintenance. The alternative chosen based on the rankings from individual decision-makers (DMs) represents the best compromise from the perceptions of all DMs involved in this problem. The proposed approach to aggregate the DMs’ preferences is well suited to the context of maintenance management for a water supply system.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arrow K (1950) A difficulty in the concept of social welfare. J Polit Econ 58:328–346
Barlow R, Hunter L (1960) Optimum preventive maintenance policies. Oper Res 8(1):90–100. doi:10.1287/opre.8.1.90
Beichelt F (1976) A general preventive maintenance policy. Mathematische Operationsforschung und Statistik 7:927–932
Brans JP, Mareschal B (1984) PROMETHEE: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. Oper Res 84:408–421
Brasil (2016a) Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. Palácio do Planalto. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Constituicao/Constituicao.htm. Accessed 27 May 2016
Brasil (2016b) Lei N\(^{\circ }\)9,433 de 8 de Janeiro de 1997. Palácio do Planalto. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Leis/L9433.htm. Accessed 27 May 2016
Burke R, Heaney JP, Pyatt EE (1973) Water resources and social choices. J Am Water Resour Assoc 9(3):433–447. doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1973.tb01758.x
Cassady CR, Kutanoglu E (2005) Integrating preventive maintenance planning and production scheduling for a single machine. IEEE Trans Reliab 54(2):304–309. doi:10.1109/TR.2005.845967
Chareonsuk C, Nagarur N, Tabucanon MT (1997) A multicriteria approach to the selection of preventive maintenance intervals. Int J Prod Econ 49:55–64. doi:10.1016/S0925-5273(96)00113-2
Christophe B, Tina R (2015) Integrating water resource management and land-use planning at the rural-urban interface: insights from a political economy approach. Water Resour Econ 9:45–59. doi:10.1016/j.wre.2014.11.005
Cullen P (1989) Social choice, risk and determinism in water quality management. Hydrobiologia 176:1–5. doi:10.1007/BF00026538
Cunha A, Morais DC (2015) Decision support model for participatory management of water resource. In: Delibašić B, Hernández JE, Papathanasiou J, Dargam F, Zaraté P, Ribeiro R, Liu S, Linden I (eds) Lecture notes in business information processing. Springer, Berlin, pp 85–97. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-18533-0_8
Daher SFD, de Almeida AT (2012) The use of ranking Veto concept to mitigate the compensatory effects of additive aggregation in group decisions on a water utility automation investment. Gr Decis Negot 21(2):185–204. doi:10.1007/s10726-011-9266-2
d’Angelo A, Szidarovsky F, Eskandary A (1998) Social choice procedures in water resource management. J Environ Manag 52(3):203. doi:10.1006/jema.1997.0156
de Almeida AT, Cavalcante CAV, Alencar MH, Ferreira RJP, Almeida-Filho AT, Garcez TV (2015b) Multicriteria and multi-objective models for risk, reliability and maintenance decision analysis. In: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. Springer, New York
de Almeida AT (2012) Multicriteria model for selection of preventive maintenance intervals. Qual Reliab Eng Int 28:585–593. doi:10.1002/qre.1415
de Almeida AT, Ferreira RJP, Cavalcante CAV (2015a) A review of the use of multicriteria and multi-objective models in maintenance and reliability. IMA J Manag Math 26(3):249–271. doi:10.1093/imaman/dpv010
de Almeida AT, de Almeida JA, Costa APCS, de Almeida-Filho AT (2016) A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: flexible and interactive tradeoff. Eur J Oper Res 250:179–191. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.058
Draginčič J, Vranešević M (2014) AHP-based group decision making approach to supplier selection of irrigation equipment. Water Resour 41:782–791. doi:10.1134/S0097807814060050
Glasser GJ (1969) Planned replacement: some theory and its application. J Qual Technol 1(2):110–119
Halabi AX, Montoya-Torres JR, Obregón N (2012) A case study of group decision method for environmental foresight and water resources planning using a fuzzy approach. Gr Decis Negot 21(2):205–232. doi:10.1007/s10726-011-9269-z
Hämäläinen RP, Kettunen E, Ehtamo H, Marttunen M (2001) Evaluating a framework for multi-stakeholder decision support in water resources management. Gr Decis Negot 10:331–353. doi:10.1023/A:1011207207809
Hersch PL, Pelkowski JE (2014) Voter demand for fluoridated water: a tale of two c(av)ities. Appl Econ Lett 21:51–54. doi:10.1080/13504851.2013.837573
IEEE (2012) Std 1366–2012: IEEE guide for electric power distribution reliability indices. IEEE, New York
Jiang R, Ji P (2002) Age replacement policy: a multi-attribute value model. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 76(3):311–318. doi:10.1016/S0951-8320(02)00021-2
Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New York
Latinopoulos D (2014) Using a choice experiment to estimate the social benefits from improved water supply services. J Integr Environ 11:187–204. doi:10.1080/1943815X.2014.942746
Li F, Brown RE, Freeman LAA (2003) A Linear Contribution factor model of distribution reliability indices and its applications in Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis. IEEE Trans Power Syst 18:1213–1215. doi:10.1109/TPWRS.2003.814906
Lienert J, Scholten L, Egger C, Maurer M (2014) Structured decision-making for sustainable water infrastructure planning and four future scenarios. EURO J Decis Process 3:107–140. doi:10.1007/s40070-014-0030-0
Madani K, Read L, Shalikarian L (2014) Voting under uncertainty: a stochastic framework for analyzing group decision making problems. Water Resour Manag 28:1839–1856. doi:10.1007/s11269-014-0556-8
Mann KB, Berry KA, Bassett S, Chandra S (2013) Voting on floodplain conservation: the role of public values and interactions along the Carson River, Nevada. Soc Nat Resour 26:568–585. doi:10.1080/08941920.2012.713449
Monte MBS, de Almeida-Filho AT (2016) A multicriteria approach using MAUT to assist the maintenance of a water supply system located in a low-income community. Water Resour Manag. doi:10.1007/s11269-016-1333-7
Morais DC, de Almeida AT, Figueira JR (2014) A sorting model for group decision making: a case study of water losses in Brazil. Gr Decis Negot 23:937–960. doi:10.1007/s10726-012-9321-7
Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2007) Group decision-making for leakage management strategy of water network. Resour Conserv Recycl 52:441–459. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.06.008
Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2010) Water network rehabilitation: a group decision-making approach. Water SA 36:487–493. doi:10.4314/wsa.v36i4.58425
Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2012) Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings. Omega 40:42–52. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2011.03.005
Nurmi H (1983) Voting procedures: a summary analysis. Br J Polit Sci 13(2):181–208. doi:10.1017/S0007123400003215
Nurmi H (2014) Some remarks on the concept of proportionality. Ann Oper Res 2015:231–244. doi:10.1007/s10479-012-1252-9
Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Rausand M, Høyland A (2004) System reliability theory: models and statistical methods. Wiley, New Jersey
Recife (2016) Characterization of neighborhoods of recife. Demographic census of 2010 (in Portuguese). http://www2.recife.pe.gov.br/servico/perfil-dos-bairros. Accessed 27 May 2016
Roozbahani A, Zahraie B, Tabesh M (2012) PROMETHEE with precedence order in the criteria (PPOC) as a new group decision making aid: an application in urban water supply management. Water Resour Manag 26(12):3581–3599. doi:10.1007/s11269-012-0091-4
Schoolmaster FA (1984) A geographical analysis of voting patterns for water related constitutional amendments in Texas, 1957–1981. J Am Water Resour Assoc 20:151–162. doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1984.tb04665.x
Silva VBS, Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2010) A multicriteria group decision model to support watershed committees in Brazil. Water Resour Manag 24:4075–4091. doi:10.1007/s11269-010-9648-2
Smith JH (1973) Aggregation of preferences with variable electorate. Econometrica 41:1027–1041. doi:10.2307/1914033
Srdjevic B et al (2007) Linking analytic hierarchy process and social choice methods to support group decision-making in water management. Decis Support Syst 42:2261–2273. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2006.08.001
Srdjevic Z, Srdjevic B (2013) Introducing the social participation concept in water management in Serbia, and related decision-making issues. Water Resour 40:469–475. doi:10.1134/S009780781304012X
Straffin PD (1980) Topics in theory of voting. Birkhäuser, Cambridge
Sun B, Wei M, Du J, Ji W, Wen M (2015) Multi-attribute group decision making method of ecological water compensation program based on preference of decision makers. J Coast Res 73:606–610. doi:10.2112/SI73-105.1
Trojan F, Morais DC (2012) Prioritizing alternatives for maintenance of water distribution networks: a group decision approach. Water SA 38:555–564. doi:10.4314/wsa.v38i4.11
UN – United Nations (2016) Resolution 64/292: the human right to water and sanitation. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/64/292. Accessed 27 May 2016
Villaverde AR, Tadeo AJP, Gómez FG (2015) The ’social choice’ of privatising urban water services: a case study of Madrid in Spain. J Policy Model 37:616–629. doi:10.1016/j.jpolmod.2015.04.005
Weibull W (1951) A statistical distribution function of wide applicability. ASME J Appl Mech 293–297
Zhao Y, Zhang F, Zhang D (2013) A group decision making model of water resources management based on supporting degrees of experts. Appl Mech Mater 357–360:2362–2365. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.357-360.2362
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for the support from CAPES, COMPESA (Sanitation Company of Pernambuco) and for the partial support of CNPq.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
de Almeida-Filho, A.T., Monte, M.B.S. & Morais, D.C. A Voting Approach Applied to Preventive Maintenance Management of a Water Supply System. Group Decis Negot 26, 523–546 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9512-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9512-8