DMsan:一个多标准决策分析框架和包,以表征环境卫生和资源回收技术的可持续性

IF 6.7 Q1 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Hannah A. C. Lohman, Victoria L. Morgan, Yalin Li, Xinyi Zhang, Lewis S. Rowles, Sherri M. Cook and Jeremy S. Guest*, 
{"title":"DMsan:一个多标准决策分析框架和包,以表征环境卫生和资源回收技术的可持续性","authors":"Hannah A. C. Lohman,&nbsp;Victoria L. Morgan,&nbsp;Yalin Li,&nbsp;Xinyi Zhang,&nbsp;Lewis S. Rowles,&nbsp;Sherri M. Cook and Jeremy S. Guest*,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >In resource-limited settings, conventional sanitation systems often fail to meet their goals─with system failures stemming from a mismatch among community needs, constraints, and deployed technologies. Although decision-making tools exist to help assess the appropriateness of conventional sanitation systems in a specific context, there is a lack of a holistic decision-making framework to guide sanitation research, development, and deployment (RD&amp;D) of technologies. In this study, we introduce DMsan─an open-source multi-criteria decision analysis Python package that enables users to transparently compare sanitation and resource recovery alternatives and characterize the opportunity space for early-stage technologies. Informed by the methodological choices frequently used in literature, the core structure of DMsan includes five criteria (technical, resource recovery, economic, environmental, and social), 28 indicators, criteria weight scenarios, and indicator weight scenarios tailored to 250 countries/territories, all of which can be adapted by end-users. DMsan integrates with the open-source Python package QSDsan (quantitative sustainable design for sanitation and resource recovery systems) for system design and simulation to calculate quantitative economic (via techno-economic analysis), environmental (via life cycle assessment), and resource recovery indicators under uncertainty. Here, we illustrate the core capabilities of DMsan using an existing, conventional sanitation system and two proposed alternative systems for Bwaise, an informal settlement in Kampala, Uganda. The two example use cases are (i) use by implementation decision makers to enhance decision-making transparency and understand the robustness of sanitation choices given uncertain and/or varying stakeholder input and technology ability and (ii) use by technology developers seeking to identify and expand the opportunity space for their technologies. Through these examples, we demonstrate the utility of DMsan to evaluate sanitation and resource recovery systems tailored to individual contexts and increase transparency in technology evaluations, RD&amp;D prioritization, and context-specific decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":29801,"journal":{"name":"ACS Environmental Au","volume":"3 3","pages":"179–192"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DMsan: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework and Package to Characterize Contextualized Sustainability of Sanitation and Resource Recovery Technologies\",\"authors\":\"Hannah A. C. Lohman,&nbsp;Victoria L. Morgan,&nbsp;Yalin Li,&nbsp;Xinyi Zhang,&nbsp;Lewis S. Rowles,&nbsp;Sherri M. Cook and Jeremy S. Guest*,&nbsp;\",\"doi\":\"10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p >In resource-limited settings, conventional sanitation systems often fail to meet their goals─with system failures stemming from a mismatch among community needs, constraints, and deployed technologies. Although decision-making tools exist to help assess the appropriateness of conventional sanitation systems in a specific context, there is a lack of a holistic decision-making framework to guide sanitation research, development, and deployment (RD&amp;D) of technologies. In this study, we introduce DMsan─an open-source multi-criteria decision analysis Python package that enables users to transparently compare sanitation and resource recovery alternatives and characterize the opportunity space for early-stage technologies. Informed by the methodological choices frequently used in literature, the core structure of DMsan includes five criteria (technical, resource recovery, economic, environmental, and social), 28 indicators, criteria weight scenarios, and indicator weight scenarios tailored to 250 countries/territories, all of which can be adapted by end-users. DMsan integrates with the open-source Python package QSDsan (quantitative sustainable design for sanitation and resource recovery systems) for system design and simulation to calculate quantitative economic (via techno-economic analysis), environmental (via life cycle assessment), and resource recovery indicators under uncertainty. Here, we illustrate the core capabilities of DMsan using an existing, conventional sanitation system and two proposed alternative systems for Bwaise, an informal settlement in Kampala, Uganda. The two example use cases are (i) use by implementation decision makers to enhance decision-making transparency and understand the robustness of sanitation choices given uncertain and/or varying stakeholder input and technology ability and (ii) use by technology developers seeking to identify and expand the opportunity space for their technologies. Through these examples, we demonstrate the utility of DMsan to evaluate sanitation and resource recovery systems tailored to individual contexts and increase transparency in technology evaluations, RD&amp;D prioritization, and context-specific decision making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Environmental Au\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"179–192\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Environmental Au\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Environmental Au","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenvironau.2c00067","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在资源有限的环境中,传统的卫生系统往往无法实现其目标─系统故障源于社区需求、限制和部署技术之间的不匹配。尽管存在有助于评估传统卫生系统在特定背景下的适当性的决策工具,但缺乏一个全面的决策框架来指导技术的卫生研究、开发和部署。在本研究中,我们介绍DMsan─一个开源的多标准决策分析Python包,使用户能够透明地比较卫生和资源回收替代方案,并描述早期技术的机会空间。根据文献中经常使用的方法选择,DMsan的核心结构包括五个标准(技术、资源回收、经济、环境和社会)、28个指标、标准权重情景和针对250个国家/地区的指标权重情景,所有这些都可以由最终用户进行调整。DMsan与开源Python包QSDsan(卫生和资源回收系统的定量可持续设计)集成,用于系统设计和模拟,以计算不确定性下的定量经济(通过技术经济分析)、环境(通过生命周期评估)和资源回收指标。在这里,我们展示了DMsan的核心能力,它使用了乌干达坎帕拉非正式定居点Bwaise的现有传统卫生系统和两个拟议的替代系统。两个示例用例是:(i)实施决策者用于提高决策透明度,并了解在利益相关者投入和技术能力不确定和/或变化的情况下卫生选择的稳健性;(ii)技术开发人员用于确定和扩大其技术的机会空间。通过这些例子,我们展示了DMsan在评估环境卫生和资源回收系统方面的实用性,这些系统是根据个人情况量身定制的,并提高了技术评估、RD&;D优先级,以及特定环境的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

DMsan: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework and Package to Characterize Contextualized Sustainability of Sanitation and Resource Recovery Technologies

DMsan: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework and Package to Characterize Contextualized Sustainability of Sanitation and Resource Recovery Technologies

In resource-limited settings, conventional sanitation systems often fail to meet their goals─with system failures stemming from a mismatch among community needs, constraints, and deployed technologies. Although decision-making tools exist to help assess the appropriateness of conventional sanitation systems in a specific context, there is a lack of a holistic decision-making framework to guide sanitation research, development, and deployment (RD&D) of technologies. In this study, we introduce DMsan─an open-source multi-criteria decision analysis Python package that enables users to transparently compare sanitation and resource recovery alternatives and characterize the opportunity space for early-stage technologies. Informed by the methodological choices frequently used in literature, the core structure of DMsan includes five criteria (technical, resource recovery, economic, environmental, and social), 28 indicators, criteria weight scenarios, and indicator weight scenarios tailored to 250 countries/territories, all of which can be adapted by end-users. DMsan integrates with the open-source Python package QSDsan (quantitative sustainable design for sanitation and resource recovery systems) for system design and simulation to calculate quantitative economic (via techno-economic analysis), environmental (via life cycle assessment), and resource recovery indicators under uncertainty. Here, we illustrate the core capabilities of DMsan using an existing, conventional sanitation system and two proposed alternative systems for Bwaise, an informal settlement in Kampala, Uganda. The two example use cases are (i) use by implementation decision makers to enhance decision-making transparency and understand the robustness of sanitation choices given uncertain and/or varying stakeholder input and technology ability and (ii) use by technology developers seeking to identify and expand the opportunity space for their technologies. Through these examples, we demonstrate the utility of DMsan to evaluate sanitation and resource recovery systems tailored to individual contexts and increase transparency in technology evaluations, RD&D prioritization, and context-specific decision making.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Environmental Au
ACS Environmental Au 环境科学-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: ACS Environmental Au is an open access journal which publishes experimental research and theoretical results in all aspects of environmental science and technology both pure and applied. Short letters comprehensive articles reviews and perspectives are welcome in the following areas:Alternative EnergyAnthropogenic Impacts on Atmosphere Soil or WaterBiogeochemical CyclingBiomass or Wastes as ResourcesContaminants in Aquatic and Terrestrial EnvironmentsEnvironmental Data ScienceEcotoxicology and Public HealthEnergy and ClimateEnvironmental Modeling Processes and Measurement Methods and TechnologiesEnvironmental Nanotechnology and BiotechnologyGreen ChemistryGreen Manufacturing and EngineeringRisk assessment Regulatory Frameworks and Life-Cycle AssessmentsTreatment and Resource Recovery and Waste Management
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信