Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33738734›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021

Research on the site selection of watershed public facilities as multi-use detention basin: an environmental efficiency perspective.

Hsueh-Sheng Chang, Chun-Yin Man, Qingmu Su

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hsueh-Sheng ChangDepartment of Urban Planning, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, 70101, Taiwan.
Chun-Yin ManThe Hong Kong Institute for the Humanities and Social Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Qingmu SuDepartment of Urban Planning, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, 70101, Taiwan. martain@foxmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7020-8806
National Cheng Kung University · TWUniversity of Hong Kong · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the climate change and the acceleration of urbanization, urban flood disaster is becoming increasingly frequent, leading to more severe impact than in the past. The traditional disaster alleviation strategies have gradually expanded to non-engineering disaster reduction strategies. As urban public property, public facility is more available than private land, making it the preferred strategy of site selection for urban land flood diversion. However, due to the limited government finance, how to select public facilities as the multi-use detention basin to maximize the disaster reduction and external benefits is an issue that needs to be considered before planning and decision-making. This study builds an operable decision model of site selection of urban public facilities as multi-use detention basin from the perspective of environmental efficiency. The decision model analyzes the expected costs and benefits of the multi-use detention basin based on data envelopment analysis (DEA) and cross-efficiency analysis, so as to establish the optimal combination of alternative schemes of site selection. It further compares with the traditional detention basin considering only disaster reduction efficiency to summarize how to improve the strategy of selecting multi-use detention basin site within the watershed in the future. This paper uses the watershed of Dajiaxi as a case study, and finds that (I) there is a certain trade-off relationship between the optimized schemes established from the perspective of environmental efficiency and disaster reduction efficiency evaluation. The scheme with the highest disaster reduction efficiency does not necessarily increase the external benefit significantly; (II) for the inefficient schemes, the difference between the site selection schemes and the ideal efficiency value can be measured through slack variable analysis.

Indexed as

DisastersPublic FacilitiesFloodsModels, TheoreticalUrbanizationData envelopment analysisEcosystem servicesEnvironment efficiencyMulti-use detention basinPublic facility

Identifiers

PMID33738734
OpenAlexW3137592296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.