Integrated Model of Water Optimal Allocation with a Cooperative Game Approach Case Study: Shahid Rajaee Dam

Document Type : Research Article


Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University


Introduction: Population growth and water resource constraints make optimal operation of available resources important. Considering the utility of the stakeholders and the physical limitations of the problem, the optimal allocation of water resources is, therefore, necessary. Among the proposed strategies, the game theory is one of the methods used to improve water resources management. Also, in order to achieve the optimal and fair allocation, a model and method should be selected in accordance to the conditions. Our main purpose was to study the optimal water allocation from the dam reservoir by increasing the overall profitability of the system through forming a coalition as well as increasing the profits of each water users participated in the coalition. Increase in profits will be possible without the need for any additional costs and only with the change in the operation management. Integration of Genetic Algorithm optimization model with Shapley Crisp game theory can be considered as the innovation of this research work applied to optimally allocate water from Shahid Rajaee Dam reservoir to downstream needs.
Materials and Methods: In this study, a new methodology based on crisp Shapley games is developed for optimal water allocation from the dam reservoir. First, the standard operation policy was used to determine the volume of available water. Then, the optimization model of the Genetic Algorithm was employed for initial allocation considering an equity criterion. The Crisp Cooperative Game Theory was then applied for secondary optimization of water allocation among stakeholders. The possible coalitions for increasing the overall system profits were formed using the Shapley method and the profits of each coalition were then calculated. Finally, the Shapley's value relationship was used to reassign profits to players in order to encourage them to participate in the grand coalition. This study was carried out on Shahid Rajaee dam located in 45 kilometers southwest of Sari in Tajan basin. This dam mainly supplies agricultural and drinking water. Rice and citrus production were the largest and second largest water consumer, respectively.
Results and Discussion: In this study, the monthly amount of water released from Shahid Rajaee Dam reservoir was determined by using standard utilization policy and then the amount of initial allocation to downstream dam needs was calculated using genetic algorithm optimization model. Then, by using the players' profit coefficient and the amounts allocated from the implementation of the genetic algorithm model, the initial profit values were calculated for each stakeholder. Employing the Shapley Crisp method, the amounts of water allocated to each player and their corresponding economic benefits were obtained for the grand and two-player coalition. The results showed that the grand coalition had more benefits than the binary coalitions as well as the initial allocation. At this step, the Shapley value relationship was used to reallocate the profits among the players. After allocating water to three participants based on different coalitions, since the fair share of each was obtained in the first step, payments must be made between the players in order to be fair. The player who receives more water share determined at the first step must pay money to other players receiving water less than their fair share. The method proposed for the 18 years statistical period was used to allocate water among the stakeholder. According to the findings, the formation of a grand coalition increases overall system profit without the need for any additional costs and only with revising the operation management.
Conclusion: In this research, an integrated model of optimization was developed using Genetic Algorithm and Shapley Crisp Cooperative Game Approach. The amount of financial payments among the stakeholders in the coalition was also determined based on the Shapely value. Constituent coalitions show the management impacts on water policy and demand management in the studied area. The best results were obtained when players formed a grand coalition. In other words, by participating in the grand coalition and reallocation of water and profits among players, the overall system profits will increase by 10 % and the profits of players cultivating rice, citrus and other agricultural products will rise by 6, 16 and 15 %, respectively, as compared with the condition the players do not participate in the grand coalition and water allocation is only done using the Genetic Algorithm. Therefore, the water allocation should be based on a grand coalition requiring the cooperation and participation of all stakeholders. The results indicate that this method can be applied to allocate resources equitably. It can be also used to solve social conflicts among decision-makers.


1- Aadland A., and Kolpin V. 2004. Erratum to Environmental determinants of cost sharing. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 55(1): 05-121.
2- Abdoli Gh. 2016. Game theory and its applications: Incomplete information, Evolutionary and cooperative games. Samt Press, 352P. (In Persian)
3- Asadi A., Keramatzadeh A., and Eshraghi F. 2018. Determining the optimal exploitation of groundwater resources by using game theory (Case study: Gorgan county). Journal of Water and Soil Conservation 25(3): 129-144.
4- Aubin J.P. 1981. Locally lipschitz cooperative games. Journal of Mathematical Economics 8(3): 241-262.
5- Emadi A.R., Khademi M., and Kakouei S. 2016. Evaluation of yield model and standard operation policy in developing of operation rule curve (Case study: Shahid Rajaei Dam). Journal of Water and Soil Conservation 22(6): 217-229.
6- Fisvold G.B., and Caswell M.F. 2000. Transboundary water management: game theoretic lessons for projects on the US–Mexico border. Journal of Agricultural Economics 24: 101–111.
7- Han Q., Tan G., Fu W., Mei Y., and Yang ZH. 2018. Water resource optimal allocation based on multi-agent game theory of HanJiang River Basin. Journal of Water 10(9): 1184.
8- Huang X., Chen X., and Huang P. 2018. Research on fuzzy cooperative game model of allocation of pollution discharge rights. Journal of Water 10(5): 662.
9- Kashefi Nezhad P., Hooshmand A.R., and Boroomandnasab S. 2018. Optimal allocation of water resources using non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (Case study: Hamidiyeh irrigation network). Journal of Water and Soil Conservation 25(6): 239-253.
10- Kilgore D.M., and Dinar A. 2001. Flexible water sharing within an international river Basin. Journal of Environmental and Resource Economics 18(1): 43–60.
11- Lejano R.P., and Davos C.A. 1995. Cost allocation of multiagency water resource projects: game theoretic approaches and case study. Journal of Water Resources Research 31(5): 1387–1393.
12- Lippai I., and Heaney P. 2000. Efficient and equitable impact fees for urban water systems. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 126(2): 75–84.
13- Madani K. 2010. Game Theory and Water Resources. Journal of Hydrology 381: 225-238.
14- Madani K., and Hipel K.W. 2011. Non-cooperative stability definitions for strategic analysis of generic water resources conflicts. Journal of Water Resource Management 25(8): 1949–1977.
15- Mehrparvar M., Ahmadi A., and Safavi H.R. 2015. Social resolution of conflicts over water resources allocation in a river basin using cooperative game theory approaches: a case study. International Journal of River Basin Management 14: 33-45.
16- Niksokhan M.H., Kerachian R., and Karamouz M. 2009. A game theoretic approach for trading discharge Permitsin Rivers. Journal of Water Science and Technology 60(3): 793-804.
17- Raquel S., Ferenc S., Emery J., and Abraham R. 2007. Application of game theory for a groundwater conflict in Mexico. Journal of Environmental Management 84: 560–571.
18- Sadegh M., Mahjouri N., and Kerachian R. 2010. Optimal inter-basin water allocation using crisp and fuzzy Shapley games. Journal of Water Resources Management 24(10): 2291-2310.
19- Sheikhmohammady M., and Madani K. 2008a. Bargaining over the Caspian Sea–the largest lake on the earth. In: Proc. of World Environmental and Water Resources Congress on American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE 2008), Honolulu, Hawaii, 1–9.
20- Shapley L.S. 1953. A value for n-person game. Journal of Operations Research 28: 307–318.
21- Straffin P., and Heaney J. 1981. Game theory and the Tennessee valley authority. International Journal of Game Theory 10(1): 35–43.
22- Suzuki M., and Nakayama M. 1976. The cost assignment of the cooperative water resource development: a game theoretical approach. Journal of Management Science 32(10): 1081–1086.
23- Tisdell J.G., and Harrison S.R. 1992. Estimating an optimal distribution of water entitlements. Journal of Water Resources Research 28(12): 3111–3117.
24- Von Neumann J., and Morgenstern O. 1944. Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
25- Wang L., Fang L., and Hipel K.W. 2008. Basin-wide cooperative water resources allocation. European Journal of Operational Research 190(3): 798–817.
26- Young H., Okada N., and Hashimoto T. 1982. Cost allocation in water resources development. Journal of Water Resources Research 18(3): 463–475.
Volume 33, Issue 5 - Serial Number 67
November and December 2020
Pages 695-708
  • Receive Date: 26 August 2019
  • Revise Date: 11 November 2019
  • Accept Date: 25 November 2019
  • First Publish Date: 22 December 2019