UHOH IFPRI UTalca UfZ INIA ISSERWRI IFU-IMK. Integrating Governance & Modeling Challenge Program Multi-Agent System Modeling: An Application to Water

UHOHIFPRI UTalcaUfZINIA ISSER WRIIFU-IMK

Integrating Integrating Governance & Governance & ModelingModeling

Ch

alle

ng

e P

rog

ram Multi-Agent System Multi-Agent System

Modeling:Modeling:An Application to Water An Application to Water Resource ManagementResource ManagementThomas BergerThomas BergerUniversity of HohenheimUniversity of Hohenheim

Governance Governance && Modeling ModelingC

halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

CGIAR Challenge ProgramCGIAR Challenge Program

Global challenge: provision of food and environmental security First cycle of competitive grant funding: program budget US$ 30 - 40 million 342 concept notes, 98 full proposals, 50 approved projects, 16 immediately fundedIFPRI/UHOH are co-leading the project 'Integrating Governance and Modeling' (1 of 16)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Benchmark BasinsBenchmark Basins

Project sites of Integrating Governance & Modeling


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Project WebsiteProject Website


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Key QuestionsKey Questions

Improve process understanding of water resource systems?Contribution of Multi-Agent Systems Models?Integrating Governance and Modeling?


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Simulation Models in AgricultureSimulation Models in Agriculture

Based on Hazell/Norton (1986) and Hanf (1989)

MAS +++

MAS ++

Type of scenario

Not profit-maximizing

Imperfect markets

Adjustment processes

Interdependencies at sector level

Spatial set-up

Aggregated Approach Independent Farms


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Scales of Simulation ModelsScales of Simulation Models

Aggregated Regional Models

MP-basedMulti-Agent Models

Kraichgau (Dabbert et al.)

1.500 km2Uganda(UHOH)

12 km2

Regflud(RAUMIS)

25.000 km2Chile(UHOH)

670 km2

Danubia (GLOWA)

28.000 km2Hohenlohe(Happe)

734 km2


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Here: Class of ProblemsHere: Class of Problems

Technical and institutional innovations in smaller-scale water resource systemsSpatial externalities, property rights, distributional effectsCompensation mechanisms, viability, implementationPotential for collective action, participation of resource users and managers


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Structure of TalkStructure of Talk

Management of water resource systems– Social Ecological Systems– CGIAR Challenge Program on Water & Food

MAS as part of policy-relevant monitoring systems– Parameterization and model coupling– Use of legacy models

Outlook– Possible contributions of simulation models– Challenges ahead


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Social Ecological Systems #1Social Ecological Systems #1Water resource systems are a subset of Social Ecological Systems (Walker et al., 2002)Interdependencies among actors through interactions with biophysical and biological entities– Irrigation systems – Fishing, Hunting

Resource users invested in physical and institutional infrastructure– Resource managers, providers of public infrastructure– Potential for collective action


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Social Ecological Systems #2Social Ecological Systems #2

Resourceusers

Infrastructureproviders

Public infrastructure

Resource

Based on Janssen/Ostrom (2006)

1 2

4 3

5

6

Water availability

Election of directorate Contribution of users

Establishing/Maintaining infrastructure

Reduction of water availability

Maintenance, Monitoring, Sanctioning

Rainfall variability Water contamination

Change in water code

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

6

7Wittmer et al. (2006)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Social Ecological Systems #3Social Ecological Systems #3

Important Research IssuesSelf-organization and cultural adaptation, robustness of social ecological systemsDynamics in ecological subsystem, linking of model approaches to effective monitoring systemsCommon-pool resources, linkages between resource users and providers of infrastructure, institutional “memory“Establishment of multi-stakeholder platforms for local resource management (action research, collaborative learning)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Requirements for Policy-Relevant Requirements for Policy-Relevant Modeling Systems (PRMS)Modeling Systems (PRMS)

informative– provide information on changing resource use

conditions and give early warnings

intelligent – identify causes and suggest solutions

interactive – bring key stakeholders together to obtain

consensus on management problems and to assign responsibilities for agreed solutions

Hazell et al. (2001)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Research Questions related to PRMSResearch Questions related to PRMS

Identify functions and frictions within multi-stakeholder governance structuresDevelop actor-centered and knowledge-based tools for planning supportAssess impacts of using these tools on decision/policymakingSuggest appropriate institutional solutions for using toolsCollaborative research and learning framework


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Project Project Integrating Governance & Integrating Governance & ModelingModeling

Analysis of multi-stakeholder governance structures– Policy Pilot Studies in cooperation with stakeholders

Identification of stakeholders' problems, policy options and criteria for evaluation of the policy optionsExtension of integrated modeling system – Incorporate impact of climate change on resource use

decisions– Evaluation of policy options, as identified by stakeholders

Development of decision-support tools – Present and visualize outputs of modeling systems in a form

that is useful for the stakeholders, and

Actual use of the decision-support tools in negotiation and planning processes – Up-scaling of pilot project experiences


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Policy Background in ChilePolicy Background in ChileGeneral political system– Unitary state, centralized– “Model” for far-reaching privatization– Limited role of NGOs

Advanced stage of basin development– Water user rights privatized– Management of infrastructure devolved to user

associations– State subsidies for irrigation infrastructure – Concessions to private sector for large-scale infrastructure

Problems– Security of water flow (storage capacity)– Maintenance of infrastructure


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Institutional AnalysisInstitutional Analysis

Comisión Regional de Riego(CRR)

Regional Irrigation Commission

DirecciónGeneral de

Aguas(DGA)

Water Agency

Dirección de Obras

Hidraulicas(DOH)

Hydraulic Works

INDAP(no vote)

Extension service/ peasant

development

Regional Representative (SEREMI) of Ministerio de

Obras Publicas

Ministry of Public Works

Regional Representative (SEREMI) of Ministerio de

Agricultura

Ministry of Agriculture

Registers water rights and water user organizations; provides technical advice in case of conflicts

Operates hydrological measurement network

Coordinates the new Comisión Regional de Recursos Hidricos(CRRH)

Administers the funding program RiegoCampesino for family farms (approx. 70 % to individuals and 30 % to groups)

Approx. 20 % of the funds go through PRODESAL (municipal development program) to farmers classified as poor in CASEN survey

Other state institutions

River

Junta de VigilanciaWatch Committee

Canal

Asociación CanalistasCanal Association

Comunidades de AguaWater User Communities

Private Sector Companies(Consultancy for funding applications, construction work)

Other water sources (e.g., wells)

Comisión Regional de Recursos

Hidricos(CRRH)

Multi-Stakeholder Platform

Other stake-holders

Witt

mer

et

al.

(200

6)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Interactions of ActorsInteractions of Actors

GIS: Plan Director Cuenca Maule


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Collaborative Research & Learning Collaborative Research & Learning FrameworkFramework1. First round contacts, introductions

Inform stakeholders, contribute to understanding governance structures

2. Demonstrations of the modelElicit feed-back on problems, needs and potential solutions and evaluation criteria (use cases, scenarios); may involve another workshop

3. Organizing feed-back, esp. regarding front-endMore workshops and evaluation of workshops, may also involve smaller working groups/interviews

4. Practical use of the model by stakeholdersIdentification of people who to train, training - training version of the model

5. Monitoring/evaluating the use of models by stakeholdersEstablishing the use potential of the model

Wittmer et al. (2006)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Options Perceived by StakeholdersOptions Perceived by Stakeholders

Sta

keho

lder

Wor

ksho

p, C

asa

Peh

uenc

he, C

hile

22-2

3 N

ov. 2

005


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Priorities of StakeholdersPriorities of Stakeholders

Water resources management– Environmental impacts (water quality)– Quantification of return-flows

Implications of medium/large-size reservoirs– Water availabilty, water price, income– Regulations concerning concessions

Options for infrastructure improvement– Project / investment analysis– Impacts on return-flows

Impacts of government programs– Social effects (distribution of benefits, poverty

alleviation)– Analysis of cost efectiveness


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Layers Components

Networks Communication model

Land markets Auction model

Property rights Land registry

Water run-off WaSiM-ETH

Factor endowment Household survey

Soil quality GIS/DEM

Land useMILPCropWat

Multi-Agent Systems (MAS)Multi-Agent Systems (MAS)

Berger et al. (2006)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Demo Version and ManualDemo Version and Manual

http://www.uni-hohenheim.de/mas/software/


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Empirical Parameterization (1)Empirical Parameterization (1)

Land tenure based on data of CIREN-CORFO

Agricultural and forestry plots


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m


N = 5400 n = 250

Actors Data processing

01 0011 10

11 1111 11

11 0101 0101 0101 0101 0110 0011 0111 1101 0111 1101 0011 11N = 5400

Agents

Estimate distribution functions

Apply Monte Carlo-approach

Assign characteristics to computational agents

Validate statistical consistency


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Monte-Carlo Data Generator

Objective: Automated generation of possible agent populations

Procedure:Sequential assignment following distribution functions

1. Area of land

2. # plots

3. # hh members

4. Educational level

4. Age of members

5. # cows

6. # goats

7. # chicken

Agent No. 1



halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Empirical Parameterization (4)Empirical Parameterization (4)Empirical distribution over all farm households

Berger/Schreinemachers (2006)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Empirical Parameterization (5)Empirical Parameterization (5)Empirical distribution in household clusters

Ber

ger

/Sch

rein

emac

hers

(20

06)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Empirical Parameterization (6)Empirical Parameterization (6)Family composition (survey vs. model results)

Berger/Schreinemachers (2006)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Production & marketing

results

Tenure

Production

Irrigation

Investments

Agent decision making

Recursive agent decision model

Agent interactions

Communication networks

Resource markets

land, labor, water

Water return flows

Continue farming?

Off-farm;migration

no

yes

Household agent

performance last year

Expectations for next year

prices, water

Agent BehaviorAgent Behavior


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Consumption side

1.Savings

(Quadratic savings model)

2.Food expenditures

(Working-Leser model)

3.Food item expenditures

(LA/AIDS model)

Production side

1.Mitscherlich yield

response

(TSPC)

2.Labor reduction factor

(Cobb-Douglas production function)

Maximization of expected household income implemented with mixed-integer mathematical programming (MIP)

Modeling Agent Decision-MakingModeling Agent Decision-Making

Sch

rein

em

ach

ers

/Berg

er

(in p

rint)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Validation of WASIM-ETHValidation of WASIM-ETH

Leemhuis (2006)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

1. Environmental indicators– Land use– Nutrient balances– Water return-flows

2. Socioeconomic indicators– Cash-flow– On-farm capital– On-farm labor– Relative factor payment

Graphical User InterfaceGraphical User Interface

Thanks to T. Arnold (UHOH)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Effect of technical change on average household income

Years [1 = 1997]

Effect of technical change on average water use efficiency

Years [1 = 1997]

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

$ [1

0,00

0 Chi

lean

Pes

os]

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

On-

field

wat

er u

se e

ffici

ency

ideal technical change

market solution

without innovation

Preliminary Simulation ResultsPreliminary Simulation Results

Berg

er

et

al. (

20

06

)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Why Integration?Why Integration?

“Value Added“ of bridging knowledge domains– Feedback loops, thresholds and irreversibilities

Biophysical and socioeconomic data sets becoming available– Geo-referencing, merging

Participatory approaches in water management– Integrated water resources management– Water directive of European Union

„Frontier“ of applied basic research– Funding by NSF, DFG and others– Funding by EU (e.g. OpenMI)


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Expected Contributions of Integrated Expected Contributions of Integrated Model SystemsModel Systems

Resolving basic information problem if process of integration succeedsQuantification of temporal and spatial externalities, ex ante analysis of policy options, exploring scope for collective actionMAS as part of policy-relevant monitoring systems could serve platform for exploration of alternative management rules and compensation mechanisms


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Challenges AheadChallenges Ahead

Model sensitivity analysisData analysis and interpretationRepresentation of social interactionsPractical use of PRMSKnowledge representation and knowledge engineering


halle

ng

e P

rogra

m

Model Team at UHOHModel Team at UHOHAlexandra Theune Groundwater and Water Quality

Arnélida Gorrín Satellite imagery, remote sensing, classification of land use change in Chile

Chris Schilling Gross Margin Analysis, calibration of MIP, updating of MAS input data set in Chile

Constanze Leemhuis Calibration of WASIM using Richards Equations in Chile; Proposal for extension of fine-scale WASIM model in Ghana (Atankwidi+)

Florian Bruns Programming of GIS structure and TDT for MAS-WASIM model coupling

Hamil Uribe WASIM irrigarion sections, GIS input data in Chile; Use-Case Analysis

Hannes König WASIM (Top Soil model) in Chile plus Gross Margin Calculations

Jingtao Wang Computer Programming; Solver for Mixed-Integer Programming

Marco Huigen Use-Case Analysis; Advice on options for model coupling

Markus Mast Coupling of MAS and WASIM; programming of WASIM interface

Paul Fuentes Compilation of model input data in Chile

Pepijn Schreinemachers

MAS Teaching Module; programming of Visual Basic Macros for MAS input data set

Sascha Holzauer MAS Teaching Module; Project Website

Thomas Berger Programming of MAS source code

Thorsten Arnold Coupling of MAS and WASIM; programming of MAS interface; programminng of User Front End, data input and output processing routines

Tsegaye Yilma Fieldwork in Ghana (Household and Market Survey), Use-Case Analysis

Documents

UHOH IFPRI UTalca UfZ INIA ISSERWRI IFU-IMK. Integrating Governance & Modeling Challenge Program Multi-Agent System Modeling: An Application to Water