Using multiple indices to evaluate scenarios for the remediation of contaminated land: the Porto Marghera (Venice, Italy) contaminated site

Background, aim, and scopeThe management of contaminated sites requires the investigation of different involved aspects (from socioeconomic to risk and technological issues) and the presentation of useful and condensed information to decision makers. For this purpose, indices are more and more recognized as effective and valuable tools. This paper presents specific indices created within the DEcision Support sYstem for REhabilitation of contaminated sites (DESYRE).Materials and methodsDESYRE is a software which aids decision making for the rehabilitation of a large contaminated site (i.e., megasite) by the creation and comparison of different rehabilitation alternatives. The software is composed of six modules, each dealing with a specific aspect of the remediation process, ending with the decision module. In this module, scenarios (i.e., suitable solutions for the rehabilitation of the contaminated site including selected land use, socioeconomic benefits, remediation costs, time span, environmental impacts, technology set/s, and residual risk) are created and evaluated by means of suitable indices. Nine indices cover the socioeconomic, risk, technological, cost, time, and environmental impact aspects. Mathematical algorithms are used to calculate these indices by taking into account data collected during the analytical steps of the DESYRE system and elaborated through the support of the spatial analysis, which is embedded in the system.ResultsThe case study of Porto Marghera, Venice, Italy is presented in order to document the effectiveness of developed indices in evaluating management solutions and presenting options to decision makers. For the purpose of this study, three different scenarios for the remediation of a part of the site of Porto Marghera (approximately 530 ha) are developed and compared. The three scenarios consider the industrial land use and deal with the contamination in soil caused by inorganic and organic compounds. The scenarios mainly differ for the number of the included remediation technologies and for the spatial distribution of the technologies on the considered area.DiscussionIndices results allow the user to more easily evaluate the advantages and limits of each scenario in order to select the most appropriate one. For instance, the risk indices allow the user to identify scenarios with good performance in reducing the extension of risk areas and the risk magnitude. Equally, the technological indices support the achievement of efficient remedial solutions characterized by a limited number of technologies, applied to extended areas and with high performance. The environmental impact index allows users to estimate the wider effects on the environment of the selected solutions, while the socioeconomic index is the result of social and economic investigations of the regional and local conditions, which ends with the identification of the best land use (e.g., the industrial one for the Porto Marghera area).ConclusionsThe proposed nine DESYRE indices provide more complete information to investigate suitable management solutions. DESYRE indices facilitate the definition of a consensus among stakeholders and the achievement of a widely shared solution for contaminated site management, even at larger sites, such as Porto Marghera.Recommendations and perspectivesFurther improvements to the system may be adopted, e.g., the possibility to aggregate results of the different assessments into one synthetic index per scenario or the inclusion of a Group Decision Making procedure.

[1]  Ibrahim Khadam,et al.  Applicability of risk-based management and the need for risk-based economic decision analysis at hazardous waste contaminated sites. , 2003, Environment international.

[2]  Andrea Critto,et al.  Decision Support Systems for Risk-Based Management of Contaminated Sites , 2009 .

[3]  Antonio Marcomini,et al.  DESYRE: Decision Support System for the Rehabilitation of Contaminated Megasites , 2007, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[4]  Jennie Popp,et al.  Sustainability indices with multiple objectives , 2001 .

[5]  Michael Edward Hohn,et al.  An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics: by Edward H. Isaaks and R. Mohan Srivastava, 1989, Oxford University Press, New York, 561 p., ISBN 0-19-505012-6, ISBN 0-19-505013-4 (paperback), $55.00 cloth, $35.00 paper (US) , 1991 .

[6]  E. A. Vik,et al.  Towards a framework for selecting remediation technologies for contaminated sites , 2001 .

[7]  Ibrahim M. Khadam,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis with probabilistic risk assessment for the management of contaminated ground water , 2003 .

[8]  Dana L. Hoag,et al.  The impact matrix approach and decision rules to enhance index dimensionality, flexibility and representation , 2002 .

[9]  Antonio Marcomini,et al.  A spatial risk assessment methodology to support the remediation of contaminated land. , 2008, Environment international.

[10]  Gerhardus Schultink,et al.  Critical environmental indicators: performance indices and assessment models for sustainable rural development planning , 2000 .

[11]  T. Sullivan,et al.  FRAMEWORK FOR DECISION SUPPORT USED IN CONTAMINATED LAND MANAGEMENT IN EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA. , 2000 .

[12]  Adam M. Paruch,et al.  Comparison of methods for calculation of sustainability indices for alternative sewerage systems—Theoretical and practical considerations , 2007 .

[13]  Claudia Bauzer Medeiros,et al.  WOODSS - a spatial decision support system based on workflows , 1999, Decis. Support Syst..

[14]  Terje Aven,et al.  On the use of risk and decision analysis to support decision-making , 2003, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[15]  Antonio Marcomini,et al.  Decision Support–Oriented Selection of Remediation Technologies to Rehabilitate Contaminated Sites , 2006, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[16]  G E Apostolakis,et al.  Application of risk assessment and decision analysis to the evaluation, ranking and selection of environmental remediation alternatives. , 2000, Journal of hazardous materials.

[17]  D. Niemeijer.  Developing indicators for environmental policy: data-driven and theory-driven approaches examined by example , 2002 .

[18]  F. Lootsma.  Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis via Ratio and Difference Judgement , 1999 .

[19]  Lisa Segnestam.  Indicators of Environment and Sustainable Development , 2002 .

[20]  Jacek Malczewski,et al.  GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis , 1999 .

[21]  R. Ramanathan,et al.  Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages , 1994 .

[22]  Lennart Olsson,et al.  Categorising tools for sustainability assessment , 2007 .

[23]  I. Malkina-Pykh.  Integrated assessment models and response function models: pros and cons for sustainable development indices design , 2002 .

[24]  Omar Masera,et al.  Evaluating the sustainability of complex socio-environmental systems. the MESMIS framework , 2002 .

[25]  D. Bryant,et al.  Environmental indicators : a systematic approach to measuring and reporting on environmental policy performance in the context of sustainable development , 1995 .