This is a bilingual snapshot page saved by the user at 2024-6-6 12:20 for https://app.immersivetranslate.com/pdf-pro/7ebf9e40-56ec-4c0a-be75-5c8ef81cc657, provided with bilingual support by Immersive Translate. Learn how to save?
2024_06_05_1fd3b6cc710f6df89b8eg
引用:魏怀斌,赵士威,刘静,等.地下水超采综合治理效益评价 . 华北水利水电大学学报(自然科学版), 2024,45（3）： .
Citation:Wei Huaibin,Zhao Shiwei,Liu Jing,et al. Benefit evaluation of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining . Journal of North China University of Water Conservancy and Hydropower (Natural Science Edition), 2024,45(3): .
WEI Huaibin, ZHAO Shiwei, LIU Jing, et al. Evaluation of benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-exploitation [ J]. Journal of North China university of water resources and electric power (natural science edition), 2024, 45 (3) : 51-59.
DOI: j. ncwu. zk. 2024029

地下水超采综合治理效益评价  Evaluation of the Benefits of Comprehensive Groundwater Overexploitation Management

Abstract

魏怀斌 ， 赵士威 ， 刘静 , 张丽莉 (1. 华北水利水电大学管理与经济学院, 河南 郑州 2 华北水利水电大学 水利学院, 河南 郑州 450046; 3. 华北水利水电大学水资源学院, 河南郑州 450046 ; 4. 河南省黄河流域水资源节约集约利用重点实验室,河南 郑州 450046; 5. 沦州市水利工程质量技术中心, 河北 沧州 061000)
Wei Huaibin ， Zhao Shiwei ， Liu Jing , Zhang Lili (1. College of Management and Economics, North China University of Water Resources and Hydropower, Zhengzhou, Henan, China 2. College of Water Resources, North China University of Water Resources and Hydropower, Zhengzhou, Henan, China 450046; 3. College of Water Resources, North China University of Water Resources and Hydropower, Zhengzhou, Henan, China 450046; 4. Key Laboratory of Conservation and Intensive Utilization of Water Resources of the Yellow River Basin of Henan, Zhengzhou, Henan, China 450046; 5. Reducing the quality center of water resources engineering, Cangzhou, Hebei 061000. Water Resources Engineering Quality and Technology Center, Cangzhou 061000, Hebei, China).

摘 要: 地下水超采综合治理是加强新时代生态文明建设、保障国家水安全的重大决策部署, 是打基础、利长远的战略性工程。其治理效益关乎着治理工作推进的有效性, 是衡量地下水超采综合治理水平的关键。为定量评价地下水超采区综合治理效益, 以 “八大准则”为框架, 以 18 项必选指标、12 项备选指标为基础, 构建了基于 “目标-准则 -指标” 的多层级地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系; 结合层次分析法和摘权法确定指标权重, 采用 “单指标量化-多指标综合-多准则集成” 的方法计算地下水超采综合治理效益指数 (GGI), 定量评价了地下水超采综合治理水平, 并对河南省滑县、内黄县、汤阴县开展地下水超采综合治理效益评价实例研究。结果表明: 滑县、内黄县、汤阴县的地下水超采综合治理效益指数的等级均为良好, 主要制约因素为地下水水位变化幅度、地下水水质达标情况、水文化传承载体数量。基于该研究结果提出多渠道增加水源供给、优化农业种植结构 、改造升级企业生产工艺、加大宣传和教育力度等改善措施。经实例验证, 所提出的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系能真实反映地下水超采综合治理的工作效果, 可为地下水超采综合治理提供参考依据。
Abstract: Comprehensive management of over-mining of groundwater is a major decision-making deployment to strengthen the construction of ecological civilization in the new era and safeguard national water security, and it is a strategic project to lay the foundation for long-term benefits. The effectiveness of the management depends on the effectiveness of the management work and is the key to measure the level of the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining. In order to quantitatively evaluate the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater overmining areas, a multi-level evaluation system of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater overmining based on "target-criteria-indicators" was constructed with the framework of "eight criteria", 18 mandatory indicators and 12 alternative indicators. The system combines the hierarchical analysis method and the weighting method to determine the weights of the indicators, and adopts the method of "single-indicator quantification-multi-indicator synthesis-multi-criteria integration" to calculate the GGI, which quantitatively evaluates the level of the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining and conducts a case study on the evaluation of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining for the counties of Slide County, Neihuang County, and Tangyin County, Henan Province. The results show that: the groundwater over-mining comprehensive management level in The results show that the benefit indexes of groundwater over-mining in Jiuxian, Neihuang and Tangyin counties are all good, and the main constraints are the magnitude of change in the groundwater level, the compliance of groundwater quality, and the number of water culture inheritance carriers. Based on the results of this study, the proposed improvement measures include increasing water supply through multiple channels, optimizing agricultural planting structure, upgrading production process of enterprises, and increasing publicity and education. It is verified by examples that the proposed benefit evaluation system of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management can truly reflect the effect of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management, and can provide a reference basis for comprehensive groundwater over-mining management.

关键词: 地下水综合治理; 效益评价; 评价体系; 评价指标; 评价方法
Keywords: Integrated Groundwater Management; Benefit Evaluation; Evaluation System; Evaluation Indicators; Evaluation Methods
中图分类号:TV213.4 Classification Number:TV213.4
文献标识码:A Literature identification code:A
文章编号 :2096-6792(2024)03-0051-09
Article number :2096-6792(2024)03-0051-09

Evaluation of Benefits of Comprehensive Management of Groundwater Over-exploitation

WEI Huaibin , ZHAO Shiwei , LIU Jing , ZHANG Lili
WEI Huaibin , ZHAO Shiwei , LIU Jing , ZHANG Lili

Abstract

(1. School of Management and Economics, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450046, China; 2. School of Water Conservancy, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450046, China; 3. College of Water Resources, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450046, China; 4. Henan Key Laboratory of Water Resources Conservation and Intensive Utilization in the Yellow River Basin, Zhengzhou 450046, China; 5. Cangzhou Water Conservancy Engineering Quality Technology Center, Cangzhou 061000, China)

收稿日期: 2022-07-15 Received: 2022-07-15
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目 (51979107)。
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51979107).
第一作者: 魏怀斌 (1981-),男,副教授,博导,博士,从事水文水资源方面的研究。E-mail:weihuaibin2008@126.com。通信作者:刘静 (1987一), 女,博士,讲师,从事水文水资源方面的研究。E-mail:liujingdx@ncwu.edu.cn。
First author: Wei Huaibin (1981-), Male, Associate Professor, PhD, Doctor, engaged in hydrology and water resources research. E-mail:weihuaibin2008@126.com. Corresponding author: Liu Jing (1987-), Female, PhD, Lecturer, engaged in hydrology and water resources research. e-mail:liujingdx@ncwu. E-mail: liujingdx@ncwu. edu.cn.

Abstract

Comprehensive management of over-exploitation of groundwater is a major decision-making deployment to strengthen the construction of ecological civilization in the new era and safeguard national water security, and it is a strategic project to lay a foundation for long-term benefits. The effectiveness of its governance is related to the effectiveness of the advancement of the governance work, which is the key to measure the level of comprehensive governance of groundwater overdraft. In order to quantitatively evaluate the comprehensive management benefit of groundwater over-exploitation area, a multi-level evaluation system of "target, criterion, and index" was constructed based on the "eight criteria" and 18 required indicators and 12 alternative indicators. Combined with analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and entropy weight method to determine the index weight, the method of "single index quantification, multi-index synthesis, multi-criteria integration" is applied to calculate the comprehensive governance benefit Index (GGI) of groundwater over-exploitation. The comprehensive treatment level of groundwater overextraction was quantitatively evaluated, and the case study of comprehensive treatment benefit evaluation of groundwater overextraction was carried out in Hua County, Neihuang County and Tangyin County of Henan Province. The results are as follows. The comprehensive benefit index of groundwater over-exploitation in Hua County, Neihuang County and Tangyin County is sound. The main restricting factors are the change amplitude of groundwater level, the standard of groundwater quality and the number of carriers of water culture inheritance. Based on the results of the study, the author puts forward some improvement measures such as increasing water supply through multiple channels, optimizing agricultural planting structure, reforming and upgrading production technology of enterprises, and strengthening publicity and education. The results show that the evaluation system can truly reflect the effect of comprehensive treatment of groundwater over-exploitation, and can provide reference for comprehensive treatment of groundwater over-exploitation.

Keywords : comprehensive management of groundwater; benefit evaluation; evaluation system; evaluation index; evaluation method
2022 年 “中国水周”活动的宣传主题为 “推进地下水超采综合治理 复苏河湖生态环境”,说明地下水超采问题已引起社会的广泛关注。河南省是我国水资源严重短缺的省份, 地下水作为其重要的供水水源,在保障城乡供水安全和农业灌溉方面发挥了不可替代的作用。20 世纪 70 年代后地下水被大规模开发利用, 2013 年地下水开采量达到峰值, 为 138.8 亿 , 占当年全省用水总量的 。长期过度开发利用地下水, 造成地下水水位下降, 从而引发地面沉降等地质环境问题, 成为影响生态保护和经济社会可持续健康发展的瓶颈。2018 年,河南省选取滑县、内黄县、汤阴县、浚县、兰考县共 5 个县开展地下水超采综合治理试点工作; 2019 年, 又增加了清丰、南乐两个县; 2022 年, 河南省地下水超采综合治理涉及 14 个市 (县、区), 着重从地下水水源置换、非常规水利用、节水灌溉工程和地下水监测体系建设等方面开展治理工作 。目前, 地下水超采综合治理工程建设已完成, 需要及时评价地下水超采综合治理成效, 从而不断改进治理措施。效益评价是检验地下水超采综合治理工作的重要方法, 是加强国家财政支出管理、提高资金使用效益的重要手段。科学合理的评价治理效果才能保障治理工作长期有效推进 。
The publicity theme of "China Water Week" in 2022 is "Promoting comprehensive management of groundwater over-exploitation and revitalizing the ecological environment of rivers and lakes", indicating that the problem of groundwater over-exploitation has attracted extensive attention from the society. Henan Province is a province with serious water resources shortage in China, and groundwater, as an important source of water supply, plays an irreplaceable role in guaranteeing the safety of urban and rural water supply and agricultural irrigation. Groundwater has been exploited and utilized on a large scale since the 1970s, and the amount of groundwater exploitation reached a peak in 2013, which was 13.88 billion , accounting for the total water consumption of the province in that year, which was . The long-term over-exploitation and utilization of groundwater has caused the groundwater level to drop, which in turn has led to geological and environmental problems such as ground subsidence, and has become a bottleneck that affects ecological protection and sustainable and healthy economic and social development. 2018, Henan Province selected five counties, namely, Slide County, Neihuang County, Tangyin County, Joon County, and Lankao County to carry out the pilot project of comprehensive management of over-exploitation of groundwater; in 2019, two counties, namely, Qingfeng County and Nanle County, will be added; and in 2022, the groundwater exploitation of the Henan Province will be reduced to a maximum of 10 billion yuan, which is the largest in the province. In 2022, the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining in Henan Province involves 14 cities (counties and districts), focusing on the replacement of groundwater sources, non-conventional water utilization, water-saving irrigation projects and the construction of a groundwater monitoring system . At present, the construction of the groundwater over-mining comprehensive management project has been completed, and it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the groundwater over-mining comprehensive management in a timely manner, so as to continuously improve the management measures. Benefit evaluation is an important method to test the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining, and it is an important means to strengthen the management of national financial expenditures and improve the efficiency of the use of funds. Scientific and reasonable evaluation of the management effect can guarantee the long-term effective promotion of the management work .
在治理效果评价方面,一些学者分别从农业节水效果 、综合治理效果评价 、地下水回补效果 、封填地下水开采井措施效果 和水量、水位、水质 等角度进行了评价研究。随着研究的深人,部分学者还考虑了社会经济因素。胡振通等 从农户视角对地下水超采治理措施进行了评价; 于翔等 从地下水超采治理效果过程化的角度进行了评价;杨得瑞等 通过采用“清” “补” “管” “测”等治理措施对华北地区地下水超采治理补水成效进行了评价; LV C M 等 开展了地下水过度开发生态补偿定量评价研究; MIRNEZAMI S J 等 采用情境交互理论评价了地下水治理效果。总体而言, 地下水超采综合治理效益评价提出时间尚短，目前相关研究主要是针对某项具体治理措施的单项评价,且尚未建立广为认可的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系 。本文在前期研究的基础上, 建立地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系,并以河南省地下水超采综合治理试点为例进行应用研究, 以期为其他地区地下水超采综合治理效益评价工作提供参考和借鉴。
In the evaluation of management effect, some scholars have conducted evaluation studies from the perspectives of agricultural water saving effect , comprehensive management effect evaluation , groundwater recharge effect , sealing and filling of groundwater mining wells effect , and water quantity, water level and water quality , etc. With deeper studies, some scholars have also considered socio-economic factors. With the deepening of research, some scholars have also considered socio-economic factors. Hu Zhentong et al. evaluated groundwater over-mining control measures from the perspective of farmers; Yu Xiang et al. evaluated the effect of groundwater over-mining control from the perspective of the process; Yang Derui et al. evaluated the effect of groundwater over-mining control through the use of the "clean," "replenishment," "management," "measurement" and other measures. evaluated the effectiveness of groundwater recharge by adopting "clearing", "replenishment", "management", "measurement" and other management measures; LV C M et al. carried out a quantitative evaluation study on ecological compensation for over-exploitation of groundwater; and MIRNEZAMI S J et al. evaluated the effectiveness of groundwater management by adopting the theory of situational interactions. Generally speaking, the evaluation of groundwater over-exploitation comprehensive management benefits has been proposed for a short period of time, and the relevant studies are mainly for the single evaluation of a specific management measure, and have not yet established a widely recognized evaluation system for the benefits of over-exploitation comprehensive management of groundwater . On the basis of the previous research, this paper establishes an evaluation system for the benefits of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management, and carries out an applied research on the pilot project of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management in Henan Province as an example, so as to provide reference and reference for the evaluation of the benefits of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management in other regions.

1 评价体系理论框架 1 Theoretical framework of the evaluation system

构建科学合理的效益评价指标体系是科学评价治理效果的关键,本文提出一套具有普适性的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系。其建立过程为：1)构建评价指标体系。基于对地下水超采综合治理措施的深人分析, 以治理措施和效益为依据选取相关
Constructing a scientific and reasonable benefit evaluation index system is the key to scientifically evaluating the effect of governance, and this paper proposes a set of comprehensive groundwater over-exploitation management benefit evaluation system with universality. The establishment process is as follows: 1) Construct the evaluation index system. Based on the in-depth analysis of the comprehensive management measures of groundwater overmining, the relevant evaluation index system is selected based on the management measures and benefits.
指标, 构建评价指标体系。(2) 确定评价方法。选择指标量化方法, 结合建立的评价指标体系, 确定评价方法和步骤。(3)制定评价标准。根据国内现有规范、治理建设计划、超采区特征, 选取与评价要求相符的指标评价标准。(4) 实例应用研究。基于建立的评价体系进行实例分析, 验证评价体系的可靠性,并结合评价结果识别出制约地下水超采综合治理的主要因素,提出地下水管理对策与建议。地下水超采综合治理体系框架如图 1 所示。
Indicators, to build the evaluation index system. (2) Determine the evaluation method. Select the quantitative method of indicators, combined with the establishment of the evaluation index system, to determine the evaluation methods and steps. (3) Formulate evaluation standards. According to the existing domestic norms, governance and construction plans, and the characteristics of the overmining area, select the evaluation standard of the indicators in line with the evaluation requirements. (4) Example application research. Based on the established evaluation system, carry out example analysis to verify the reliability of the evaluation system, identify the main factors constraining the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining and put forward groundwater management countermeasures and suggestions. The framework of the comprehensive management system of groundwater over-mining is shown in Fig. 1.
图 1 地下水超采综合治理体系框架 Figure 1 Comprehensive Groundwater Overdraft Management System Framework

2 地下水超采综合治理效益评价 2 Evaluation of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining

2.1 评价指标体系构建 2.1 Construction of evaluation index system

从地下水超采的综合治理措施、治理结果及效益等多个方面选取指标初步建立评价指标体系, 参考地下水超采综合治理效益评价已有研究成果、地下水超采综合治理效益评价的现有文献、国家标准、行业规范、相关规划制度等文件,采用高频分析法、专家咨询法分析所选中的评价指标与各准则层的相关性,经过笕选确定最终的评价指标。文中基于目标层、准则层、指标层的层次关系框架,从体制机制建设、工程措施建设、监管措施建设、资金投人使用情况、压采目标成效、生态效益、经济效益、社会效益等 8 个方面出发构建了地下水超采综合治理效益评价指标体系,包括必选指标 18 个,备选指标 12 个,共计 30 个指标 (见表 1 )。
The evaluation index system was initially established by selecting indicators from various aspects such as comprehensive management measures, results and benefits of over-mining of groundwater, etc. The evaluation index system was established by referring to the existing research results on the evaluation of the benefits of over-mining of groundwater, existing literature on the evaluation of the benefits of over-mining of groundwater, national standards, industrial norms, relevant planning systems, etc. The correlation of selected evaluation indicators with the guideline levels was analyzed by using the high-frequency analysis method and the expert consultation method, and the final evaluation indicators were determined by Kakehashi selection. High frequency analysis method and expert consultation method were used to analyze the correlation between the selected evaluation indexes and each criterion layer, and the final evaluation indexes were selected by Kakei. Based on the hierarchical framework of target layer, criterion layer and indicator layer, the evaluation index system of comprehensive management of groundwater overdraft was constructed from eight aspects, including the construction of institutional mechanism, the construction of engineering measures, the construction of regulatory measures, the utilization of capital investment, the effectiveness of the target of suppression of mining, ecological benefits, economic benefits, social benefits, etc., and included 18 mandatory indexes and 12 alternative indexes, totaling 30 indexes (see Table 1). See Table 1).
表 1 地下水超采综合治理效益评价指标体系 Table 1 Evaluation index system for the benefits of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management
准则层 指标层 指标标准值 Indicator standard value
 Indicator Nature
指标
性质
 Indicator Type
指标
类型
优秀 良好 中等 及格 不及格
 Institutional mechanisms
体制机制
建设情况
农业水价改革制度完善程度  Degree of improvement of the agricultural water pricing reform system 正向 必选
最严格水资源管理制度完善程度  Degree of improvement of the most stringent water resources management system 正向 必选
工程管护体制完善程度  Degree of sophistication of the project management system 正向 必选
水法律法规建设程度  Degree of construction of water laws and regulations 正向 备
高效节水灌溉工程  Efficient Water Saving Irrigation Project 正向 必选
工程措施 Engineering measures 水肥一体化工程  Water and Fertilizer Integration Project 正向 备选
建设情况 Construction 水源置换工程  water replacement project 正向 必选
非常规水工程  Non-conventional water works 正向 备
地下水回补工程  Groundwater recharge project 正向 备
续表
准则层 指标层 指标标准值 Indicator standard value
 Indicator Nature
指标
性质
 Indicator Type
指标
类型
优秀 良好 中等 及格 不及格
 Regulatory measures Construction B3
监管措施
建设情况
B3
地下水开采井封填工程  Groundwater extraction well sealing and filling works 正向 必选
取用水计量工程  Water intake metering project 正向 必选
地下水动态监测工程  Groundwater dynamic monitoring project 正向 必选
 Funding sources Utilization
资金投人
使用情况
资金投人量 (亿元
Volume of funds invested (billion dollars) 		正向 备选
资金到位率  Funding availability 正向 必选
资金安全使用情况  Secure utilization of funds 正向 备选
 Pressurized mining targets Achievement
压采目标
成效情况
地下水超采系数  Groundwater overdraft coefficient 反向 备选
地下水压采率  Groundwater squeeze rate 正向 必选
地下水水位变化幅度  Magnitude of change in groundwater levels 正向 必选
地下水供水比例  Proportion of water supplied by groundwater 反向 备选
 Ecological Benefits
生态
效益
地面沉降速率 年
Ground Subsidence Rate years 		反向 必选
浅层超采区面积  Area of shallow overmined area 反向 必选
深层超采区面积  Area of deep overmining 反向 备选
地下水水质达标情况  Groundwater quality compliance I 类 II 类 Category II III 类 Category III IV 类 Category IV V 类 反向 备选
 Economic benefits
经济
效益
农业收人占 GDP 比重  Agricultural income as a share of GDP 反向 必选
工业收人占 GDP 比重  Industrial receipts as % of GDP 正向 必选
农业节水收益率  Agricultural water saving yields 正向 备选

Per capita income of urban residents million yuan 人・年
城镇居民人均收人
万元 人・年
正向 备选
 Social benefits
社会
效益
水文化传承载体数量 个 Number of water culture heritage carriers 正向 必选
公众对综合治理的认知度 分 Public Perception of Integrated Governance Score 正向 必选
公众对综合治理的满意度 分 Public Satisfaction with Integrated Governance score 正向 必选
在实际应用中, 指标的选取可结合评价区域的特点, 有针对性地进行选择和确定适合本地区的评价指标。
In practical application, the selection of indicators can be combined with the characteristics of the evaluation region, targeted selection and determination of evaluation indicators suitable for the region.

2.2 评价标准 2.2 Evaluation criteria

评价标准是评价指标水平的主要刻度。目前中国尚无地下水超采综合治理效益评价的统一标准。本文评价等级分类及各指标分级标准的确定依据包括：(1)已有水资源评价的国家标准、行业规范; (2) 国家及区域的法律法规和发展规划政策、方针; (3) 现有相关文献中对应的指标值; (4)专家咨询意见。据此,将地下水超采综合治理效益评价指标划分为 5 个等级, 分别表示优秀、良好、中等、及格、不及格, 见表 1。需要说明的是, 表 1 中指标的标准值仅适用于河南省地下水超采综合治理效益评价,不同地区可以根据超采区的特点和评价目标的需求, 选择适合本地区地下水超采综合治理的标准值。
Evaluation standards are the main scale for evaluating the level of indicators. At present, there is no unified standard for evaluating the benefits of comprehensive groundwater overdraft management in China. In this paper, the basis for the classification of the evaluation level and the grading standard of each index includes: (1) existing national standards and industrial norms for water resources evaluation; (2) national and regional laws and regulations, and development planning policies and guidelines; (3) the corresponding index values in the existing relevant literature; (4) expert advice. Accordingly, the evaluation indexes of the efficiency of comprehensive management of groundwater overmining are divided into five grades, which are excellent, good, medium, pass and fail, as shown in Table 1. It should be noted that the standard values of the indexes in Table 1 are only applicable to the evaluation of the efficiency of comprehensive management of groundwater overmining in Henan Province, and the different regions can choose the standard values suitable for the comprehensive management of groundwater overmining in their own regions according to the characteristics of overmining zones and the evaluation target needs. Different regions can choose the standard values suitable for the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining in their regions according to the characteristics of over-mining areas and the needs of evaluation objectives.

2. 3 指标权重 2.3 Indicator weights

指标权重是指标在评价体系中所占的比例量化, 反映了指标的相对重要程度, 权重值影响整个评价结果。本文对比分析了不同赋权方法的优缺点,最终采用层次分析法 与熵值法 相结合的组合赋权法 计算指标权重。首先, 采用层次分析法计算出反映专家知识经验的主观权重; 然后, 利用摘值法求得客观权重; 最后, 将主、客观权重结合起来, 进而得到组合权重, 以达到在充分考虑主观性的同时,保证客观性的目的。
Indicator weight is the quantification of the proportion of the indicator in the evaluation system, reflecting the relative importance of the indicator, and the weight value affects the whole evaluation result. This paper compares and analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of different weighting methods, and finally adopts the combination of hierarchical analysis method and entropy value method to calculate the indicator weights. Firstly, the subjective weights reflecting the experts' knowledge and experience are calculated by hierarchical analysis method; then, the objective weights are obtained by extracting value method; finally, the subjective and objective weights are combined to obtain the combined weights, so as to achieve the purpose of guaranteeing objectivity while fully considering subjectivity.

2.3.1 层次分析法权重计算 2.3.1 Hierarchical analysis weight calculation

1)构建判断矩阵。通过两两比较对同一准则层的评价指标之间的相对重要性进行判断, 采用 9 位标度法表示指标之间的相对重要性, 构建判断矩阵 。
1) Construct judgment matrix. By comparing the relative importance of the evaluation indicators in the same criterion layer, the judgment matrix was constructed by using the 9-digit scale method to express the relative importance of the indicators.
。
式中: 为指标 相比指标 的重要性; 为指标个数。
Where: is the importance of indicator compared to indicator ; is the number of indicators.
  1. 计算判断矩阵 每一行元素乘积的 次方根 。其计算公式为:
    Calculate the square root of the product of the elements of each row of the judgment matrix . The formula is.
  1. 利用公式 (3) 对 进行归一化处理, 得到权重向量 。
    The weight vector is obtained by normalizing using equation (3).
  1. 通过一致性比例 CI/RI 进行一致性检验。其计算公式为:
    The consistency test was performed by the consistency ratio CI/RI. The formula is.
式中: 为一致性指标; 为平均随机一致性指标; 为最大特征值。当 时, 认为判断矩阵满足要求, 通过一致性检验; 否则, 调整判断矩阵, 直到满足上述要求为止。
Where: is the consistency index; is the average random consistency index; is the maximum eigenvalue. When is used, it is considered that the judgment matrix meets the requirements and passes the consistency test; otherwise, the judgment matrix is adjusted until it meets the above requirements.

2. 3. 2 熵值法权重计算
2. 3. 2 Entropy method weight calculation

1)采用公式 (5)对各项指标进行标准化处理。 1) The indicators were standardized using equation (5).
式中: 为样本数; 为指标个数; 为第 个样本的第 个指标值; 、、、、、、 。
Where: is the number of samples; is the number of indicators; is the value of the th indicator for the th sample; 、、、、、、 .
2）计算各指标的信息熵 : 2) Calculate the information entropy of each indicator :
  1. 将信息摘 转换为反映指标差异大小的
    Converting the information extracted from to reflect the magnitude of differences in the indicators
式中 为摘值法权重。 Where is the weight of the extracted value method.

2.3.3 综合权重计算 2.3.3 Calculation of combined weights

运用组合赋权模型, 得到组合权重, 最终确定各评价指标的权重 。其计算公式为:
The combination weights are obtained by using the combination weighting model, and the weights of each evaluation index are finally determined at . The formula is as follows.

2.4 评价方法 2.4 Evaluation methodology

本文采用左其亭等 提出的单指标量化-多指标综合-多准则集成评价方法,对地下水超采区综合治理效益进行综合评价。计算步骤为:
In this paper, the single-indicator quantification-multi-indicator synthesis-multi-criteria integrated evaluation method proposed by Zuo Qiting et al. was used to comprehensively evaluate the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining areas. The calculation steps are as follows.
步骤 1 单指标量化。由于各评价指标的量纲不完全相同,采用模糊隶属度函数法, 将各指标映射到 上,在此基础上计算隶属度值。根据国家标准、行业规范、现有研究成果、相关制度与规划、专家意见等确定评价指标的特征节点值, 即不及格值 、及格值 、中等值 、良好值 和优秀值 , 具体结
Step 1 Quantification of single index. Since the scale of each evaluation index is not exactly the same, the fuzzy affiliation function method is adopted to map each index to , on the basis of which the affiliation value is calculated. According to the national standards, industry norms, existing research results, relevant systems and plans, expert opinions and so on to determine the characteristic node values of the evaluation indicators, that is, failing value , passing value , intermediate value , good value and excellent value , the specific nodes
指标层 评分标准 marking scheme
优秀值  merit value 良好值  good value 中等值  fair value 及格值  passing value 不及格值  failure value
农业水价改革制度完善程度  Degree of improvement of the agricultural water pricing reform system 100 80 70 60 30
最严格水资源管理制度完善程度  Degree of improvement of the most stringent water resources management system 100 80 70 60 30
工程管护体制完善程度  Degree of sophistication of the project management system 100 70 50 40 20
水法律法规建设程度  Degree of construction of water laws and regulations 100 70 55 40 20
高效节水灌溉工程  Efficient Water Saving Irrigation Project 100 85 70 60 30
水肥一休化工程  Water and Fertilizer Monohydration Project 100 85 70 60 30
水源置换工程  water replacement project 100 80 60 40 20
非常规水工程  Non-conventional water works 100 80 60 40 20
地下水回补工程  Groundwater recharge project 100 85 70 50 25
地下水开采井封填工程  Groundwater extraction well sealing and filling works 100 85 70 50 25
取用水计量工程  Water intake metering project 100 85 70 50 25
地下水动态监测工程  Groundwater dynamic monitoring project 100 85 70 50 25
资金投人量 亿元 ) (Capital investment volume billion dollars) 10 8 6 4 2
资金到位率  Funding availability 100 80 60 40 20
资金安全使用情况  Secure utilization of funds 100 80 60 40 20
地下水超采系数  Groundwater overdraft coefficient 10 20 30 40 60
地下水压采率  Groundwater squeeze rate 100 80 60 40 20
地下水水位变化幅度  Magnitude of change in groundwater levels 2 1 0 -1 -2
地下水供水比例  Proportion of water supplied by groundwater 10 20 30 40 50
果见表 2 。各特征节点值对应的隶属度值分别为 0 、 、、、 。权数：
The results are shown in Table 2. The corresponding affiliation values for each feature node value are 0 , 、、、 . Weights:
表 2 地下水超采综合治理效益评价指标特征值 Table 2 Characteristic values of indicators for evaluating the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining
续表
指标层 评分标准 marking scheme
优秀值  merit value 良好值  good value 中等值  fair value 及格值  passing value 不及格值  failure value
地面沉降速率 年
Ground Subsidence Rate years 		1 3 5 7 10
深层超采区面积  Area of deep overmining 0 100 1000 2000 5000
浅层超采区面积  Area of shallow overmined area 0 100 1000 2000 5000
地下水水质达标情况  Groundwater quality compliance I 类 II 类 Category II III 类 Category III IV 类 Category IV V 类
农业收人占 GDP 比重  Agricultural income as a share of GDP 10 20 30 40 50
工业收人占 GDP 比重  Industrial receipts as % of GDP 50 40 30 20 10
农业节水收益率  Agricultural water saving yields 50 40 30 20 10

Per capita disposable income of urban residents (ten thousand yuan) 人・年
城镇居民人均可支配收人
(万元 人・年
4 3 2 1 0
水文化传承载体数量 个 Number of water culture heritage carriers 5 4 3 2 1
公众对综合治理的认知度 分 Public Perception of Integrated Governance Score 100 80 60 30 15
公众对综合治理的满意度 分 Public Satisfaction with Integrated Governance score 100 80 60 30 15
步骤 2 多指标综合。对单指标隶属度值进行加权计算, 得到对应准则层的效益指数。如生态效益指数 、经济效益指数 、社会效益指数 的计算公式分别为:
Step 2 Multi-indicator synthesis. Weighting the affiliation values of single indexes to get the benefit index of the corresponding criterion layer. For example, the formulas for the eco-efficiency index , the economic efficiency index and the social efficiency index are: , , , , , , , , , , , .
式中: 、、 分别为生态效益、经济效益、社会效益准则层中评价指标的个数; 、、 分别为生态效益、经济效益、社会效益准则层中各评价指标的权重; 、、 分别为生态效益、经济效益、社会效益准则层中各评价指标的隶属度值。
Where: 、、 is the number of evaluation indicators in the eco-efficiency, economic efficiency, and social efficiency criterion layers, respectively; 、、 is the weight of each evaluation indicator in the eco-efficiency, economic efficiency, and social efficiency criterion layers, respectively; 、、 is the affiliation value of each evaluation indicator in the eco-efficiency, economic efficiency, and social efficiency criterion layers, respectively.
步骤 3 多准则集成。在确定各准则层效益指数后, 按照各准则层权重加权计算得到地下水超采综合治理效益指数 , 计算公式为:
Step 3 Multi-criteria integration. After determining the benefit index of each criterion layer, the benefit index of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining is calculated by weighting the weights of each criterion layer to obtain , which is calculated as follows.
式中: 为地下水超采综合治理效益指数; 、 、 、、、、、 分别为准则层 、、 、 、、、 的效益指数; 、、、、、、 、 为准则层 、、、、、、 的权重。
Where: is the benefit index of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management; 、 and 、、、、、 are the benefit indices of the guideline layer 、、 and 、、、 respectively; 、、、、、、 and are the weights of the guideline layer 、、、、、、 .
根据 值的大小, 按照 0.2 的间距把综合治理效益指数分为 5 个等级 (表 3)。经过计算, 得到各准则层效益指数的大小, 进而确定区域综合治理效益指数的影响因子。
According to the size of the value, the comprehensive governance effectiveness index was divided into 5 levels with a spacing of 0.2 (Table 3). After calculation, the size of the benefit index of each criterion level was obtained, and then the influence factors of the regional comprehensive governance benefit index were determined.
表 3 综合治理效益评价标准 Table 3 Criteria for evaluating the benefits of integrated management
效益等级 Benefit level 优秀 良好 中等 较差 差
等级指数  rating index

3 实例应用 3 Example applications

3. 1 研究区概况 3.1 Overview of the study area

以河南省安阳市的滑县、内黄县、汤阴县为研究区, 研究区东与幞阳市毗邻、西与鹤壁市接壤, 地形复杂多样, 京广铁路以西为丘陵地带, 以东为黄河冲积平原, 地势呈西南高、东北低走向。研究区位置如图 2 所示。
The study area is located in the slip county, Neihuang county and Tangyin county of Anyang city, Henan province, which is adjacent to T幞yang city in the east and bordering with Hebi city in the west, with complex and diversified terrain, including hilly area to the west of Beijing-Guangzhou Railway and Yellow River alluvial plain in the east, and the topography of which shows a high southwest and a low northeast direction. The location of the study area is shown in Figure 2.
安阳市人均水资源量为 , 为全省人均水资源量的 ,为全国人均水资源量的 ,且安阳市三县均因无拦蓄工程, 地表水资源利用率较低, 主要依靠开采地下水满足农业用水和生活用水需求。由于过度开采地下水, 滑县、汤阴县大部分区域地下水超采, 浅层地下水超采区面积分别为 、, 多年平均超采量分别为 5836 万、 2166 万 ; 内黄县整个区域地下水超采, 浅层地下水超采区面积为 , 多年平均超采量为 4465 万 , 持续超采使得地下水位不断下降, 含水层被疏干,土壤孔隙被压缩,引起地面沉降,进而引发一系列环境地质问题。2018 年河南省积极响应国家关于地下水超采综合治理工作的总体部署,选取滑县、内黄县、汤阴县、浚县、兰考县 5 个县实施地下水超采综合治理试点工作。文中以滑县、汤阴县、
The per capita water resources of Anyang City is , which is the per capita water resources of the province , and the per capita water resources of the country , and the three counties of Anyang City have no storage projects, the utilization rate of surface water resources is low, and they mainly rely on the exploitation of groundwater to satisfy the demand for agricultural water and domestic water. Due to over-exploitation of groundwater, most of the areas in Sliu County and Tangyin County are over-exploited, the shallow groundwater over-exploited area is 、 , and the average over-exploited amount over the years is 58.36 million and 21.66 million respectively. ; Neihuang County is over-exploited in the whole area, the shallow groundwater over-exploited area is , and the average over-exploited amount over the years is 44.65 million. , and the sustained over-exploitation makes the groundwater level drop, the aquifers are dried up, and the pore space of the soil is compressed, causing the ground subsidence. In 2018, Henan Province actively responded to the overall deployment of the national comprehensive management of groundwater over-exploitation, and selected five counties, namely, Slide County, Neihuang County, Tangyin County, Joon County, and Lankao County, to implement the pilot project of comprehensive management of groundwater over-exploitation. In the text, the pilot program is carried out in the counties of Slide County and Tangyin County,
内黄县 3 个试点县为例开展地下水超采综合治理效益评价研究。
Three pilot counties in Neihuang County were used as examples to carry out a study on the evaluation of the benefits of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management.
图 2 研究区位置 Figure 2 Location of the study area

3. 2 数据来源 3.2 Data sources

基于建立的地下水超采综合治理效益评价指标体系, 分别对滑县、汤阴县、内黄县 2020 年地下水超采综合治理工作进行综合治理效益评价研究。其中:体制机制建设、工程措施建设、监管措施建设、资金投人使用的指标数据来源于《河南省地下水超采区综合治理方案 (2018-2020 年度)》《工程验收报告》《财政专项拨付凭证》; 压采目标成效、生态效益指标数据来源于《安阳市水资源公报》《安阳市水资源调查评价及综合利用规划》; 经济效益指标数据来源于《安阳市国民经济和社会发展统计公报》《安阳市统计年鉴》; 社会效益指标数据通过调研和问卷调查方式来获取。
Based on the established index system for evaluating the benefits of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management, the comprehensive management benefits of groundwater over-mining management in 2020 were evaluated in Shixian County, Tangyin County, and Neihuang County, respectively. Among them, the index data of institutional mechanism construction, engineering measures construction, regulatory measures construction, and capital investment and utilization are from "Comprehensive Management Program of Groundwater Over-mining Areas in Henan Province (2018-2020)", "Engineering Acceptance Report", and "Voucher of Financial Special Disbursement"; the data of effectiveness of suppression target and ecological benefit indexes are from "Water Resources Bulletin of Anyang Municipality", "Water Resources Survey, Evaluation and Comprehensive Utilization Plan of Anyang Municipality"; and the data of economic benefit indexes are from "Water Resources Bulletin of Anyang Municipality", "Water Resources Survey, Evaluation and Comprehensive Utilization Plan of Anyang Municipality". Comprehensive Utilization Planning of Water Resources in Anyang City"; Economic Benefit Indicators from "Anyang City National Economic and Social Development Statistics Bulletin" and "Anyang City Statistical Yearbook"; and Social Benefit Indicators through research and questionnaire survey.

3.3 结果及分析 3.3 Results and Analysis

结合研究区的特点, 通过篮选获得用于地下水超采综合治理效益评价的指标, 共计 24 个,除 18 个必选指标外还包括前述 12 个备选指标中的地下水回补工程、资金投人量、资金安全使用情况、地下水超采系数、地下水水质达标情况和城镇居民人均可支配收人 6 个备选指标。按 2.4 节中的计算步骤,求得 3 个试点县 2020 年地下水超采综合治理效益的评价结果, 见表 4 。由表 4 可知, 滑县、内黄县、汤阴县的效益指数值均在 这一范围内, 即均处于良好等级。 3 个试点县 2020 年地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系中各准则和指标的效益指数雷达图如图 3 所示。表 43 个试点县 2020 年地下水超采综合治理效益评价结果
Taking the characteristics of the study area into account, 24 indicators for the evaluation of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining are obtained through basket selection, including the groundwater recharge project, the amount of capital investment, the safe use of funds, the coefficient of groundwater over-mining, the groundwater quality standardization, and the urban per capita disposable income in the 12 alternative indicators, in addition to the 18 mandatory indicators. According to the calculation steps in section 2.4, the evaluation results of the benefits of comprehensive groundwater over-mining management in the three pilot counties in 2020 were obtained, which are shown in Table 4. From Table 4, it can be seen that the benefit index values of Shui County, Neihuang County and Tangyin County are all within the range of , i.e., they are all in the good grade. The radar diagram of the benefit index of each criterion and indicator in the benefit evaluation system of 2020 comprehensive management of groundwater overdraft in the three pilot counties is shown in Fig. 3. Table 43 Results of the evaluation of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining in 2020 in the three pilot counties.
县域 效益指数  efficiency index 评价等级 rating
滑县 0.76 良好
内黄县 0.69 良好
汤阴县 0.70 良好
由图 3(a) 可知: (1) 3 个试点县的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系的准则层中, 、、、 的效益指数值均最高, 都属于优秀等级, 3 个试点县因地制宜地施行水源置换、高效节水工程、地下水回补工程、农业水价改革、工程管护体制等治理措施,并产生效益。(2)压采目标 的效益指数差异较大。其中, 滑县的效益指数值最优, 为 0.77 ,原因在于该县地下水治理效果显著, 水位上升 ; 内黄县的效益指数值最差, 为 0.50 , 原因在于, 内黄县地下水超采严重,超采系数较大, 地下水亏损严重,短期治理成效不显著,说明该指标是制约内黄县压采目标成效的主要因素。(3)生态效益 的效益指数值整体偏低,均小于 0.65 ,原因在于,地下水长期被开采形成的超采区需要经过长期持续地治理才能有效减少超采区面积; 此外,地下水超采治理过程侧重于水量水位的治理,忽略了对水质的把控 (均为 III 类水),说明地下水水质状况是制约生态效益治理成效的主要因素。(4)经济效益 的效益指数值差异较大。其中, 内黄县的效益指数值为 0.37 , 远小于滑县的 0.68 和汤阴县的 0.7 。原因在于, 内黄县的
From Fig. 3(a), it can be seen that: (1) In the criterion layer of the comprehensive groundwater over-mining benefit evaluation system of the three pilot counties, the benefit index value of 、、、 is the highest, and all of them belong to the excellent grade, and the three pilot counties have implemented the management measures such as water source replacement, high-efficiency water-saving project, groundwater recharge project, agricultural water price reform, and project management and care system according to local conditions and have produced benefits. (2) The benefit index of varies greatly. Among them, the benefit index value of Sliu County is the best, 0.77, because of the significant effect of the county's groundwater management, the water level rise ; Neihuang County's benefit index value is the worst, 0.50, because of the serious over-exploitation of groundwater, over-exploitation coefficient is large, the groundwater loss is serious, and short-term management is not effective, which shows that this index is the main factor that restricts the effectiveness of the target of suppression of mining in Neihuang County. (3) Eco-efficiency benefit index value is low, both less than 0.65, because the over-mining area formed by long-term exploitation of groundwater needs to be treated for a long period of time in order to effectively reduce the area of over-mining area; in addition, the process of over-mining of groundwater focuses on the treatment of water quantity and level, but ignores the control of water quality (all are Class III water), which means that the groundwater quality is the main factor restricting the effectiveness of the management of eco-efficiency. This shows that groundwater quality is the main factor limiting the effectiveness of eco-efficiency management. (4) Economic benefits The benefit index value of varies greatly. Among them, the benefit index value of Neihuang County is 0.37, which is much smaller than 0.68 of Slide County and 0.7 of Tangyin County. The reason is that Neihuang County's
第一产业 GDP 的占比为 , 远高于滑县的 和汤阴县的 , 以高耗水农作物 (蔬菜、尖椒、花生等) 为主的产业结构是制约内黄县经济效益成效的主要因素。(5)社会效益 的效益指数值的整体差异较小, 均小于 0.75 , 主要是由于 3 个县开展的节水宣传教育活动较少, 公众对地下水超采的危害认识不足, 导致公众对综合治理的认可度、满意度较低, 成为社会效益指数的主要制约因素。
The proportion of GDP of primary industry is , which is much higher than that of in Slide County and in Tangyin County, and the industrial structure of high water-consuming crops (vegetables, peppers, peanuts, etc.) is the main factor restricting the effectiveness of economic efficiency in Neihuang County. (5) Social benefits: The overall difference in the benefit index value of is small, less than 0.75, mainly due to the fact that the three counties have carried out fewer water conservation publicity and education activities, and the public does not have enough knowledge of the harm of groundwater over-exploitation, which leads to low public recognition and satisfaction with the comprehensive management, and becomes a major constraint on the social benefit index.
由图 3(b) 可知, 地下水超采综合治理效益的制约因素为: 地下水水位变化幅度 、地下水水质达标情况 、农业收人占 GDP 比重 、工业收人占 GDP 比重 、水文化传承载体数量 。
From Fig. 3(b), it can be seen that the constraints on the effectiveness of the integrated management of groundwater over-mining are: the magnitude of the change of groundwater level , the compliance with the groundwater quality standard , the proportion of agricultural income to GDP , the proportion of industrial income to GDP , and the number of water culture heritage carriers .
(a) 准则层 (a) Normative layer
(b) 指标层 (b) Indicator layer
图 33 个试点县 2020 年地下水超采综合治理效益评价指标体系中各准则和指标的效益指数雷达图针对以上制约因素,提出如下地下水超采综合治理的改善措施:
Fig. 33 Radar chart of the benefit index of each criterion and indicator in the system of evaluation index of the benefit of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining in 2020 in the pilot counties In view of the above constraints, the following improvement measures are proposed for the comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining.
1)多渠道增加水源供给、实施河湖地下水回补、严格地下水利用管控; 推进地下水动态监测井的建设,实现水量水质双控。
1) Increase water supply through multiple channels, implement groundwater recharge in rivers and lakes, and strictly control the use of groundwater; push forward the construction of groundwater dynamic monitoring wells, and realize dual control of water quantity and quality.
2)积极推进农业水价改革, 调整优化农业种植结构, 建立农业用水节水奖励机制, 加快企业生产工艺改造升级,提高用水效率, 严格落实水资源管理制度。
2) Actively promote the reform of agricultural water prices, adjust and optimize the structure of agricultural planting, establish agricultural water saving incentive mechanism, accelerate the transformation and upgrading of production processes, improve water efficiency, and strictly implement the water resources management system.
3)积极做好世界水日、中国水周等宣传活动,针对不同用水群体, 开展一系列的节水宣传和教育活动,提高全民节水意识和生态保护意识。
3) Actively do a good job of World Water Day, China Water Week and other publicity activities, targeting different groups of water users, to carry out a series of water conservation publicity and education activities, to raise the awareness of the whole population of water conservation and ecological protection.

4 结论 4 Conclusion

通过对地下水超采综合治理现状的梳理和分析，以体制机制建设、工程措施建设、监管措施建设、资金投人与使用、压采目标成效、生态效益、经济效益、社会效益为框架, 以 18 项必选指标、 12 项备选指标为基础,构建了 “目标-准则-指标”多层级的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系。基于建立的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系, 结合滑县、内黄县、汤阴县的实际情况, 建立了 3 个试点县的地下水超采综合治理效益评价体系,并对这 3 个试点县 2020 年的地下水超采治理效益进行了评价。从评价结果来看,滑县、内黄县、汤阴县的效益指数分别为 、、,均处于良好等级。评价结果与 3 个试点县的实际治理情况相符, 说明建立的评价体系具有一定的科学性,可服务于推进地下水超采综合治理建设,可为其他地区的地下水超采综合治理工作提供参考。
Through sorting out and analyzing the current situation of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining, the evaluation system of "target-guideline-indicator" was constructed based on 18 mandatory indicators and 12 alternative indicators, with the framework of institutional mechanism construction, engineering measures construction, regulatory measures construction, capital investment and use, effectiveness of the target of suppression of mining, ecological benefits, economic benefits and social benefits, and the evaluation system of "target-guideline-indicator" was constructed. Based on the framework of 18 mandatory indicators and 12 alternative indicators, a multi-level evaluation system of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining was constructed, including "target-criteria-indicators". Based on the established evaluation system of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater overmining, combined with the actual situation of Slide County, Neihuang County and Tangyin County, the evaluation system of the benefits of comprehensive management of groundwater overmining in three pilot counties was established, and the benefits of the management of groundwater overmining in these three pilot counties in 2020 were evaluated. From the evaluation results, the benefit indexes of Slide County, Neihuang County and Tangyin County are 、、 , which are all in good grade. The evaluation results are in line with the actual management situation of the three pilot counties, indicating that the established evaluation system is scientific and can serve to promote the construction of comprehensive management of groundwater overdraft and provide reference for the comprehensive management of groundwater overdraft in other areas.

参 考 文 献
References

[1]王国栋. 明确目标 加强管理 多举措推进河南省地下水超采区治理 [J].中国水利, 2021(7):57-59.
[1] Wang Guodong. Clear objectives, strengthened management and multiple initiatives to promote the management of groundwater over-exploitation zones in Henan Province [J]. China Water Resources, 2021(7):57-59.
[2]陈飞,侯杰,于丽丽,等. 全国地下水超采治理分析 [J].水利规划与设计,2016(11):3-7.
[2] CHEN Fei, HOU Jie, YU Lili, et al. Analysis of national groundwater overdraft management [J]. Water Resources Planning and Design,2016(11):3-7.
[3] 于翔,解建仓,姜仁贵,等. 河北省地下水超采治理效果过程化评价 [ J]. 排灌机械工程学报, 2021,39(4): 364-371.
[3] YU Xiang, XIE Jiancang, JIANG Rengui, et al. Process evaluation of the effect of over-exploitation of groundwater in Hebei Province [ J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Machinery Engineering, 2021,39(4): 364-371.
［4］胡振通,王亚华.华北地下水超采综合治理效果评估：以冬小麦春灌节水政策为例 . 干旱区资源与环境, 2019,33(5): 101-106.
[4] Hu Zhentong, Wang Yahua. Assessment of the effect of comprehensive management of groundwater overdraft in North China: an example of water saving policy for winter wheat spring irrigation. . Arid Zone Resources and Environment, 2019,33(5): 101-106.
［5］郑智韬,张仁陟. 民勤县节水农业综合效益评价 . 湖南农业科学, 2011(5):145-148,151.
[5] Zheng Zhitao, Zhang Renzhi. Evaluation of comprehensive benefits of water-saving agriculture in Minqin County . Hunan Agricultural Science, 2011(5):145-148,151.
［6］吴乐,孔德帅,李颖,等. 地下水超采区农业生态补偿政
[6] Wu Le, Kong Deshuai, Li Ying, et al. Agricultural ecological compensation policy in groundwater over-mining area
策节水效果分析 [J]. 干旱区资源与环境,2017,31(3)： .
Analysis of the effect of water saving of the policy [J]. Arid Zone Resources and Environment,2017,31(3): .
[7]王鹏龙,宋晓谕,王宝,等. 黑河流域乡镇初始水权分配研究:以甘州区为例 . 冰川冻土, 2021,43(4):1218-1227.
[7] Wang Penglong, Song Xiaojue, Wang Bao, et al. Research on the initial water right allocation of townships in the Heihe River Basin:Taking Ganzhou District as an example . Glacial Permafrost,2021,43(4):1218-1227.
[8] XU T,YAN D M, WENG B S, et al. The effect evaluation of comprehensive treatment for groundwater overdraft in Quzhou County, China[ J]. Water, 2018, 10(7) :874-892.
[9]杜明亮, 刘全明, 吴彬, 等. 巴州地下水超采区综合治理成效评估 [J]. 新疆农业大学学报,2021,44(5):367-374.
[9] Du Mingliang, Liu Quanming, Wu Bin, et al. Assessment of the effectiveness of comprehensive management of groundwater over-mining area in Bazhou [J]. Journal of Xinjiang Agricultural University,2021,44(5):367-374.
[10] 褚敏,徐志侠,王海军. 艾丁湖流域地下水超采综合治理效果与建议 . 水资源开发与管理, 2020,59 (12): .
[10] Chu Min, Xu Zhiman, Wang Haijun. Effectiveness and Suggestions for Comprehensive Management of Groundwater Overdraft in Aidin Lake Basin . Water Resources Development and Management, 2020,59 (12): .
[11]王哲, 付宇, 朱静思, 等. 华北典型河道地下水回补效果评价 [ J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版),2021,51 (3) .
[11] WANG Zhe, FU Yu, ZHU Jingsi, et al. Evaluation of groundwater recharge effect of typical rivers in North China [ J]. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition),2021,51 (3) .
[12]王震, 杨军耀. 超采区关井压采地下水环境修复评价体系初探 . 人民黄河, 2013,35(9):82-85.
[12] WANG Zhen, YANG Junyao. A preliminary study on the evaluation system of groundwater environmental remediation for well closure and pressure mining in over-mining areas . People's Yellow River, 2013,35(9):82-85.
[13] 雷米, 周金龙, 魏兴, 等. 干旱区绿洲城市地下水超采区综合治理评估 [J]. 人民黄河,2021,43(2): 100-105.
[13] Lei M, Zhou JL, Wei X, et al. Assessment of comprehensive management of urban groundwater over-exploitation zone in arid oasis [J]. People's Yellow River,2021,43(2): 100-105.
［14］胡振通, 王亚华. 地下水超采综合治理的农户评价、原因分析与改进建议 [ J]. 中国人口・资源与环境, 2018,28(10):160-168.
［14］ Hu Zhentong, Wang Yahua. Farmers' evaluation, cause analysis and improvement suggestions for comprehensive management of groundwater overdraft [ J]. China Population・Resources and Environment, 2018,28(10):160-168.
[15]杨得瑞. 华北地下水超采综合治理河湖地下水回补试点探索与效果评估 . 中国水利, 2020(13):15-16.
[15] Yang Derui. Pilot exploration and effect assessment of groundwater recharge in rivers and lakes for comprehensive treatment of groundwater overdraft in North China . China Water Resources, 2020(13):15-16.
[16] LV C M,LING M H, W U Z N, et al. Quantitative assessment of ecological compensation for groundwater overexploitation based on emergy theory . Environmental geochemistry and health,2020,42(3):733-744.
[17] MIRNEZAMI S J, DE BOER C, BAGHERI A. Groundwater governance and implementing the conservation policy: the case study of Rafsanjan Plain in Iran[J]. Environment development and sustainability,2019,22(8):8183-8210.
[18] 左其亭,郝明辉,姜龙,等. 幸福河评价体系及其应用 [J]. 水科学进展, 2021,32(1):45-58.
[18] Zuo Qiting, Hao Minghui, Jiang Long, et al. Evaluation system of happy river and its application [J]. Progress in Water Science, 2021,32(1):45-58.
[19] 邓雪, 李家铭, 曾浩健, 等. 层次分析法权重计算方法分析及其应用研究 . 数学的实践与认识, 2012,42 (7) .
[19] Deng Xue, Li Jiaming, Zeng Haojian, et al. Analysis of Hierarchical Analysis Method of Weight Calculation Method and its Application Research . Practice and Understanding of Mathematics, 2012,42 (7) .
[20]任盼,费良军,冯细利,等. 基于模糊层次分析法的节水型生态灌区综合评价 . 灌溉排水学报,2022,41 (7) .
[20] REN Pan, FEI Liangjun, FENG Xianli, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of water-saving ecological irrigation district based on fuzzy hierarchical analysis . Journal of Irrigation and Drainage,2022,41 (7) .
[21]王富强,李鎑,赵衡,等.基于水环境容量和综合指标体系的区域水环境承载力评价 . 华北水利水电大学学报(自然科学版),2021,42(2):24-31.
[21] Wang FQ, Li L, Zhao H, et al. Evaluation of regional water environment carrying capacity based on water environment capacity and comprehensive index system . Journal of North China University of Water Conservancy and Hydropower (Natural Science Edition),2021,42(2):24-31.
[22]康德奎,谷丰佑,周伟达. 石羊河流域地下水管理综合评价 . 人民黄河, 2021,43(8):65-69.
[22] KANG Dekui, GU Fengyou, ZHOU Weida. Comprehensive evaluation of groundwater management in Shiyang River Basin . People's Yellow River, 2021,43(8):65-69.
[23] 汪林,张立影,贾玲,等. 基于组合赋权的节水型用水器具适用性评价方法 . 水利水电技术 (中英文), 2021,52 (11):195-206.
[23] Wang L, Zhang LY, Jia L, et al. Suitability evaluation method for water-saving water appliances based on combination assignment . Water Conservancy and Hydropower Technology (in Chinese and English), 2021,52 (11):195-206.
[24]李治军,王涛. 基于改进组合赋权法的区域水资源承载力评价 [ J]. 中国农村水利水电, 2022（10）: .
[24] Li Zhijun, Wang Tao. Evaluation of regional water resources carrying capacity based on improved combination empowerment method [ J]. China Rural Water Conservancy and Hydropower, 2022(10): .
[25]周全超,张洪清,焦扬,等. 基于组合赋权法的煤层顶板突水危险性评价 [ J]. 科学技术与工程, 2022,22 (9) : .
[25] ZHOU Quanchao, ZHANG Hongqing, JIAO Yang, et al. Evaluation of water breakout risk of coal seam roof based on combined empowerment method [ J]. Science, Technology and Engineering, 2022,22 (9) : .
[26]左其亭,张云, 林平. 人水和谐评价指标及量化方法研究 . 水利学报, .
[26] Zuo Qiting,Zhang Yun, Lin Ping. Research on evaluation index and quantification method of human-water harmony . Journal of Water Resources, .
( 编辑: 马伟希) ( Editor: Ma Wei Xi )