Abstract: Amidst population growth and rapid economic development, the demand for water resources is continuously increasing. However, the uncertain water demand and total supply caused by environmental changes have led to an intensified mismatch between water supply and demand. In view of this, the bankruptcy theory was applied to water resources allocation at basin scale. Four bankruptcy theory rules - the proportional rule (PRO), constrained equal awards rule (CEA), constrained equal losses (CEL), and adjusted proportional rule (AP) - are employed to address water allocation problems in the basin under various supply and demand scenarios. The stability of the bankruptcy criteria was evaluated. Additionally, the Fallback bargaining method was utilized to select consistent and satisfactory results. The findings indicate that the AP rule exhibits the best stability in all scenarios, followed by the PRO rule. The application of Fallback bargaining demonstrates that the results obtained by the PRO rule achieve unanimous satisfaction. In view of the disparity between the two rules, the PRO rule is considered to yield satisfactory result. Based on these findings, an analytical framework that combines the bankruptcy criterion and Fallback bargaining was established to offer a scientific decision-making basis for water resources management in changing basin environments.

Key words: water resources allocation, supply and demand change, bankruptcy theory, Fallback bargaining