Evaluating the Sustainability of Water and Sanitation Services
A Comparative Analysis of Methodological Approaches
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12308294 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Alexandros Maziotis (0000-0001-9817-1470, Department of Business New York College Athina Greece), María Molinos‐senante (0000-0002-6689-6861, Institute of Sustainable Processes, University of Valladolid Valladolid Spain, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 33 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 7038-7052 |
| Publication date | 2025-04-29 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Sustainable Development (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0968-0802 • E-ISSN: 1099-1719 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/sd.3511 |
| OpenAlex | W4409974156 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 55 |
Benchmarking the sustainability of water utilities (WUs) in the provision of water and sanitation services is essential for addressing global sustainability goals. This study proposes a water utility sustainability index (WUSI), which was estimated for a sample of 29 WUs in Chile. To evaluate the impact of weighting methodologies on sustainability assessments, two approaches were applied: the benefit of doubt (BoD) method and the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The results indicate that the average WUSI score under the BoD method was 0.987, with 55.17% of WUs achieving the maximum score of 1.0, whereas the AHP approach yielded a lower mean score of 0.551, with the highest‐performing WU reaching 0.737. This difference arises from the fact that the weights assigned to the indicators comprising the WUSI under the BoD approach are endogenously optimized to maximize the composite index for each WU, leading to the suppression of poor‐performing indicators. In addition, the BoD method exhibited lower variance (SD = 0.035) compared to AHP (SD = 0.095), suggesting a tendency to overestimate sustainability. The ranking of WUs also varied significantly depending on the weighting methodology used. The study revealed that utility size and geographical location influence sustainability outcomes. The significant discrepancies in WUSI scores based on the weighting methodology highlight the need for regulators to adopt a hybrid approach, combining objective, data‐driven methods with expert and stakeholder input to ensure more balanced and contextually relevant sustainability assessments
Business · Economics · Environmental economics · Environmental planning · Environmental resource management · Natural resource economics · Sanitation · Sustainability · Economic and Environmental Valuation · Efficiency Analysis Using DEA · Environmental Science · Water resources management and optimization · Ecology · Environmental Engineering
Estimation and inference in two-stage, semi-parametric models of production processes
Use of Ranks in One-Criterion Variance Analysis
Measuring the sustainability of urban water services
A multi-criteria model for measuring the sustainability orientation of Italian water utilities
Factors influencing customer satisfaction with water service quality in Chile
The new Italian water tariff method
Does service quality matter in measuring the performance of water utilities
Three pillars of sustainability
Assessing the Quality of Service of Water Companies
An Introduction to 'Benefit of the Doubt' Composite Indicators
| Highly cited | No |
|---|