A combined GIS-MCDA approach to prioritize stream water quality interventions, based on the contamination risk and intervention complexity

Highlights: • The majority of Ave river basin surface waters are under low quality. • Contamination risk and intervention complexity were accessed by GIS-MCDA. • A "cost-benefit" decision analyses allowed ranking catchments for intervention. • The prioritization spanned 248 catchments. • Catchments under a good status were mostly ranked under low intervention priority. Water management decisions are complex ever since they are dependent on adopted politics, social objectives, environmental impacts, and economic determinants. To adequately address hydric resources issues, it is crucial to rely on scientific data and models guiding decision-makers. The present study brings a new methodology, consisting of a combined GIS-MCDA, to prioritize catchments that require environmental interventions to improve surface water quality. A Portuguese catchment, Ave River Basin, was selected to test this methodology due to the low water quality. First, it was calculated the contamination risk of each catchment, based on a GIS-MCDA using point source pressures, landscape metrics, and diffuse emissions as criteria. This analysis was compared to local data of ecological and chemical status through ANOVA and the Tukey test. The results showed the efficiency of the method since the contamination risk was lower for catchments under a good status and higher in catchments with a lower classification. In a second task, it was calculated the intervention complexity using a different GIS-MCDA. For this approach, it was chosen five criteria that condition environmental interventions, population density, slope, percentage of burned areas, Strahler order, and the number of effluent discharge sites. Both multicriteria methods were combined in a graphical analysis to rank the catchments intervention priority, subdividing the prioritization into four categories from 1st to 4th^, giving a higher preference for catchments with high contamination risk and low intervention complexity. As a result, catchments with a good status were dominantly placed under low intervention priority, and catchments with a lower ecological status were classified as a high priority, 1st and 2nd. In total, 248 catchments were spatially ranked, which is an essential finding for decision-makers, that are willing to safeguard the catchment water quality.