Using Multicriteria Methods in Environmental Planning and Management

In environmental planning and decision processes several alternatives are analyzed in terms of multiple noncommensurate criteria, and many different stakeholders with conflicting preferences are involved. Based on our experience in real-life applications, we discuss how multicriteria decision aid (MCDA) methods can be used successfully in such processes. MCDA methods support these processes by providing a framework for collecting, storing, and processing all relevant information, thus making the decision process traceable and transparent. It is therefore possible to understand and explain why, under several conflicting preferences, a particular decision was made. The MCDA framework also makes the requirements for new information explicit, thus supporting the allocation of resources for the process.     

Using triple bottom line metrics and multi-criteria methodology in corporate settings

With the growing importance of environmental sustainability in the corporate sector, businesses are compelled to progress from assessing and benchmarking their environmental impact to making decisions on how to prioritize impact reduction alternatives. Most often, business decisions are driven by financial metrics, but with sustainability improvements becoming a business goal, it is also important to assess metrics from environmental and social spheres; nevertheless, practically and systematically performing such an assessment is challenging. We present an application of a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method that addresses the aforementioned challenges in a corporate setting. Our case study company – one of the largest inland marine freight carriers in the United States – promotes a business culture focused on financially viable, yet socially and environmentally responsible solutions. Thus, we combine life cycle analysis (LCA), financial calculation methods, and corporate surveys to quantify environmental, economic, and social performance measures, respectively. Multiattribute utility theory is integrated with analytic hierarchy processes (AHPs) and fuzzy analysis to create a carefully designed framework for corporations with diverse groups of stakeholders. With company leadership, implementation is feasible and successful at prioritizing alternatives among diverse stakeholders. The process provides a platform for negotiation and promotes discussions on decision drivers. The use of MCDA methodologies promoted the inclusion of a suite of metrics that aligned with the company's sense of social and environmental responsibility, generating an in-depth analysis of the alternatives that factored in other things besides economics. Return-on-investments (ROI) calculations, the typical approach used in the corporate setting, would have required significantly less time and effort from the company, but the results of our MCDA application indicated that inclusion of triple bottom line metrics delve deeper into stakeholder preferences. Thus, our case study company gained a holistic view of the candidate alternatives, in addition to creating a platform for structured discussions about company goals and priorities.     

Multicriteria Decision Aid in Supporting Decisions Related to Groundwater Protection

In the recent decades, there have been frequent conflicts between groundwater resources and environmentally hazardous activities. An example is the construction of the new highway through the important glaciofluvial esker aquifer Nybroåsen, which passes the protection zone of the water supply for the Kalmar municipality, in the southeastern part of Sweden. The decision to build the new road through this important aquifer has been strongly questioned by the municipality and the public because the value of the water resources in Nybroåsen was not taken into consideration during the first phase of the decision-making process. Multicriteria decision aid (MCDA) is applied as a tool to structure and analyze the four road alternatives proposed in the environmental impact assessment for the above conflict. The alternatives, including the existing road, are in conflict with water resources, agriculture, natural, and cultural values. The impacts on the water resources have been predicted by a two-dimensional physically based time-variant flow and solute groundwater model, which has been calibrated and evaluated. The MCDA illustrates how it can be used to identify (1) actors and their concerns, (2) ranking of alternative road scenarios according to actors preferences, and (3) coalition groups of actors, i.e., groups that have similar views with regard to the road alternatives. The analysis shows that the two best compromise solutions obtained in the MCDA were unacceptable by the strongest coalition group, showing that either the family of criteria was not well chosen or new alternatives should have been developed.     

Harnessing Ecosystem Models and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the Support of Forest Management

The decision-making environment in forest management (FM) has changed drastically during the last decades. Forest management planning is facing increasing complexity due to a widening portfolio of forest goods and services, a societal demand for a rational, transparent decision process and rising uncertainties concerning future environmental conditions (e.g., climate change). Methodological responses to these challenges include an intensified use of ecosystem models to provide an enriched, quantitative information base for FM planning. Furthermore, multi-criteria methods are increasingly used to amalgamate information, preferences, expert judgments and value expressions, in support of the participatory and communicative dimensions of modern forestry. Although the potential of combining these two approaches has been demonstrated in a number of studies, methodological aspects in interfacing forest ecosystem models (FEM) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) are scarcely addressed explicitly. In this contribution we review the state of the art in FEM and MCDA in the context of FM planning and highlight some of the crucial issues when combining ecosystem and preference modeling. We discuss issues and requirements in selecting approaches suitable for supporting FM planning problems from the growing body of FEM and MCDA concepts. We furthermore identify two major challenges in a harmonized application of FEM-MCDA: (i) the design and implementation of an indicator-based analysis framework capturing ecological and social aspects and their interactions relevant for the decision process, and (ii) holistic information management that supports consistent use of different information sources, provides meta-information as well as information on uncertainties throughout the planning process.     

How Can We Make Progress with Decision Support Systems in Landscape and River Basin Management? Lessons Learned from a Comparative Analysis of Four Different Decision Support Systems

This article analyses the benefits and shortcomings of the recently developed decision support systems (DSS) FLUMAGIS, Elbe-DSS, CatchMODS, and MedAction. The analysis elaborates on the following aspects: (i) application area/decision problem, (ii) stakeholder interaction/users involved, (iii) structure of DSS/model structure, (iv) usage of the DSS, and finally (v) most important shortcomings. On the basis of this analysis, we formulate four criteria that we consider essential for the successful use of DSS in landscape and river basin management. The criteria relate to (i) system quality, (ii) user support and user training, (iii) perceived usefulness and (iv) user satisfaction. We can show that the availability of tools and technologies for DSS in landscape and river basin management is good to excellent. However, our investigations indicate that several problems have to be tackled. First of all, data availability and homogenisation, uncertainty analysis and uncertainty propagation and problems with model integration require further attention. Furthermore, the appropriate and methodological stakeholder interaction and the definition of ‘what end-users really need and want’ have been documented as general shortcomings of all four examples of DSS. Thus, we propose an iterative development process that enables social learning of the different groups involved in the development process, because it is easier to design a DSS for a group of stakeholders who actively participate in an iterative process. We also identify two important lines of further development in DSS: the use of interactive visualization tools and the methodology of optimization to inform scenario elaboration and evaluate trade-offs among environmental measures and management alternatives.     

Multi-criteria risk management with the use of <Emphasis Type="Italic">DecernsMCDA</Emphasis>: methods and case studies

Emerging challenges of risk management, environmental protection, and land-use planning requires integration of stakeholder values and expert judgment. The process of decision making in situation of high uncertainty can be assisted through the use of decision support systems (DSSs). Such DSSs are often based on tools for spatial data representation (GIS) and environmental models that are integrated using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). This paper presents DecernsMCDA implementing all major types of multi-criteria methods and tools (AHP, MAUT, Outranking) under the same user interface. In addition to providing ability for testing model uncertainty associated with selection of specific MCDA algorithms, DecernsMCDA implements new algorithms for parameter uncertainty analysis based on probabilistic approaches and fuzzy sets. The paper illustrates application of DecernsMCDA for selecting remedial alternative at radiologically contaminated sites.     

Multi‐Criteria Decision Support Systems for Flood Hazard Mitigation and Emergency Response in Urban Watersheds1

Abstract: Flood management problems are inherently complex, time‐bound and multi‐faceted, involving many decision makers (with conflicting priorities and dynamic preferences), high decision stakes, limited technical information (both in terms of quality and quantity), and difficult tradeoffs. Multi‐Criteria Decision Support Systems (MCDSS) can help to manage this complexity and decision load by combining value judgments and technical information in a structured decision framework. A brief overview of MCDSS is presented, an original MCDSS architecture is put forth, and future research directions are discussed, including extensions to Multi‐Criteria Spatial Decision Support Systems and group MCDSS (as flood management involves shared resources and broad constituencies). With application to the September 11‐12, 2000 Tokai floods in Japan, the proposed multi‐criteria decision support instruments enhance communication among stakeholders and improve emergency management resource allocation. In summary, by making the links among flood knowledge, assumptions and choices more explicit, MCDSS increases stakeholder satisfaction, saves lives, and reduces flood management costs, thereby increasing decision‐making effectiveness, efficiency and transparency.     

Integrating conflict analysis and consensus reaching in a decision support system for water resource management

The importance of shared decision processes in water management derives from the awareness of the inadequacy of traditional--i.e. engineering--approaches in dealing with complex and ill-structured problems. It is becoming increasingly obvious that traditional problem solving and decision support techniques, based on optimisation and factual knowledge, have to be combined with stakeholder based policy design and implementation. The aim of our research is the definition of an integrated decision support system for consensus achievement (IDSS-C) able to support a participative decision-making process in all its phases: problem definition and structuring, identification of the possible alternatives, formulation of participants' judgments, and consensus achievement. Furthermore, the IDSS-C aims at structuring, i.e. systematising the knowledge which has emerged during the participative process in order to make it comprehensible for the decision-makers and functional for the decision process. Problem structuring methods (PSM) and multi-group evaluation methods (MEM) have been integrated in the IDSS-C. PSM are used to support the stakeholders in providing their perspective of the problem and to elicit their interests and preferences, while MEM are used to define not only the degree of consensus for each alternative, highlighting those where the agreement is high, but also the consensus label for each alternative and the behaviour of individuals during the participative decision-making. The IDSS-C is applied experimentally to a decision process regarding the use of treated wastewater for agricultural irrigation in the Apulia Region (southern Italy).     

The Decision Analysis Interview Approach in the Collaborative Management of a Large Regulated Water Course

There are always conflicting goals in the management of large water courses. However, by involving stakeholders actively in the planning and decision-making processes, it is possible to work together toward commonly acceptable solutions. In this article, we describe how we applied interactive multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) in a collaborative process which aimed at an ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable water course regulation policy. The stakeholders' opinions about the alternative regulation schemes and the relative importance of their impacts were elicited with the HIPRE software. Altogether, 20 personal interactive decision analysis interviews (DAIs) were carried out with the stakeholders. Our experience suggests that the DAIs can considerably improve the quality and efficiency of the collaborative planning process. By improving communication and understanding of the decision situation in the steering group, the approach helped to develop a consensus solution in a case having strong conflicts of interest. In order to gain the full benefits of the MCDA approach, interactive preference elicitation is vital. It is also essential to integrate the approach tightly into the planning and decision-making process. The project's home pages are available to the public at http://www.paijanne.hut.fi/.     

An Evaluation of Multiple Objective Decision Support Weighting Techniques in Natural Resource Management

Multiple objective decision support (MODS) is a structured framework for evaluating decision alternatives against multiple, and often conflicting, criteria. Its ability to handle complex trade-offs in a variety of quantitative and qualitative units gives it much potential in the field of natural resource management (NRM). A key component of MODS is the process used to obtain information from decision makers on the relative importance of evaluative criteria. Ranking algorithms then use this information to determine the relative value of each decision alternative. This paper explores how practising community based NRM decision makers respond to five generic methods for weighting the criteria. It presents a study in which 55 decision makers throughout five regions in Queensland, Australia, applied MODS to evaluate environmental projects seeking funding under the Australian Natural Heritage Trust. Weighting methods applied include fixed point scoring, rating, ordinal ranking, a graphical method and paired comparisons. Decision makers evaluated each weighting method in terms of ease of use and of how much it helped clarify the decision problem. Results show that decision makers felt uncomfortable applying fixed point scoring and generally preferred to express their preferences through ordinal ranking. This has implications for the types of ranking algorithms that can be applied to evaluate the decision alternatives.     

Prioritization of water management for sustainability using hydrologic simulation model and multicriteria decision making techniques

The objective of this study is to develop an alternative evaluation index (AEI) in order to determine the priorities of a range of alternatives using both the hydrological simulation program in FORTRAN (HSPF) and multicriteria decision making (MCDM) techniques. In order to formulate the HSPF model, sensitivity analyses of water quantity (peak discharge and total volume) and quality (BOD peak concentrations and total loads) are conducted and a number of critical parameters were selected. To achieve a more precise simulation, the study watershed is divided into four regions for calibration and verification according to landuse, location, slope, and climate data. All evaluation criteria were selected using the Driver–Pressure–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) model, a sustainability evaluation concept. The Analytic Hierarchy Process is used to estimate the weights of the criteria and the effects of water quantity and quality were quantified by HSPF simulation. In addition, AEIs that reflected residents' preferences for management objectives are proposed in order to induce the stakeholder to participate in the decision making process.     

Sustainable Water Resources Management in a Conflict Resolution Framework1

Abstract: A decision support system for sustainable water resources management in a water conflict resolution framework is developed to identify and evaluate a range of acceptable alternatives for the Geum River Basin in Korea and to facilitate strategies that will result in sustainable water resource management. Working with stakeholders in a “shared vision modeling” framework, sustainable management strategies are created to illustrate system tradeoffs as well as long‐term system planning. A multi‐criterion decision‐making (MCDM) approach using subjective scales is utilized to evaluate the complex water resource allocation and management tradeoffs between stakeholders and system objectives. The procedures used in this study include the development of a “shared vision model,” a simulated decision‐making support system (as a tool for sustainable water management strategies associated with water conflicts, management options, and planning criteria), and the application of MCDM techniques for evaluating alternatives provided by the model. The research results demonstrate the utility of the sustainable water resource management model in aid of MCDM techniques in facilitating flexibility during initial stages of alternative identification and evaluation in a basin suffering from severe water conflicts.     

An integrated impact assessment and weighting methodology: evaluation of the environmental consequences of computer display technology substitution

Computer display technology is currently in a state of transition, as the traditional technology of cathode ray tubes is being replaced by liquid crystal display flat-panel technology. Technology substitution and process innovation require the evaluation of the trade-offs among environmental impact, cost, and engineering performance attributes. General impact assessment methodologies, decision analysis and management tools, and optimization methods commonly used in engineering cannot efficiently address the issues needed for such evaluation. The conventional Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) process often generates results that can be subject to multiple interpretations, although the advantages of the LCA concept and framework obtain wide recognition. In the present work, the LCA concept is integrated with Quality Function Deployment (QFD), a popular industrial quality management tool, which is used as the framework for the development of our integrated model. The problem of weighting is addressed by using pairwise comparison of stakeholder preferences. Thus, this paper presents a new integrated analytical approach, Integrated Industrial Ecology Function Deployment (I2-EFD), to assess the environmental behavior of alternative technologies in correlation with their performance and economic characteristics. Computer display technology is used as the case study to further develop our methodology through the modification and integration of various quality management tools (e.g., process mapping, prioritization matrix) and statistical methods (e.g., multi-attribute analysis, cluster analysis). Life cycle thinking provides the foundation for our methodology, as we utilize a published LCA report, which stopped at the characterization step, as our starting point. Further, we evaluate the validity and feasibility of our methodology by considering uncertainty and conducting sensitivity analysis.     

Informing the development of decision support tools for risk management: the case of electrical and magnetic fields

This paper describes tools developed through a community consultative process to help decision makers manage electrical and magnetic fields (EMF) health risk. The process involved in‐depth interviews with experts (N=12) and focus group discussions with seven different stakeholder groups. The results reveal commonly held intense public concerns about the long‐term health effects of EMF. These concerns were further reinforced by the lack of public trust in both government and industry with regards to EMF risk management. Overall, the participants wanted tools that can be used to manage EMF information, scientific uncertainty about EMF and the complex environment in which EMF issues are embedded. The findings contributed to a mapping out of response formats to address public concerns related to risk, hazard, trust, accountability and fairness across a range of stakeholder groups. These tools and their roles in the management of complex and variable risks, involving new circumstances (e.g. privatization) and information (e.g. new scientific studies) are presented. The importance of recognizing and working with uncertainty through adaptive management strategies, using qualitative approaches, is also discussed.     

Measuring sustainable development using a multi-criteria model: A case study

This paper shows how Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) can help in a complex process such as the assessment of the level of sustainability of a certain area. The paper presents the results of a study in which a model for measuring sustainability was implemented to better aid public policy decisions regarding sustainability. In order to assess sustainability in specific areas, a methodological approach based on multi-criteria analysis has been developed. The aim is to rank areas in order to understand the specific technical and/or financial support that they need to develop sustainable growth.The case study presented is an assessment of the level of sustainability in different areas of an Italian Region using the MCDA approach. Our results show that MCDA is a proper approach for sustainability assessment. The results are easy to understand and the evaluation path is clear and transparent. This is what decision makers need for having support to their decisions. The multi-criteria model for evaluation has been developed respecting the sustainable development economic theory, so that final results can have a clear meaning in terms of sustainability.     

Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: incorporating stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change

Climate change poses many challenges for ecosystem and resource management. In particular, coastal planners are struggling to find ways to prepare for the potential impacts of future climate change while dealing with immediate pressures. Decisions on how to respond to future risks are complicated by the long time horizons and the uncertainty associated with the distribution of impacts. Existing coastal zone management approaches in the UK either do not adequately incorporate changing stakeholder preferences, or effectively ensure that stakeholders are aware of the trade-offs inherent in any coastal management decision. Using a novel method, scenario-based stakeholder engagement, which brings together stakeholder analysis, climate change management scenarios and deliberative techniques, the necessary trade-offs associated with long term coastal planning are explored. The method is applied to two case studies of coastal planning in Christchurch Bay on the south coast of England and the Orkney Islands off the north coast of Scotland. A range of conflicting preferences exist on the ideal governance structure to manage the coast under different climate change scenarios. In addition, the results show that public understanding of the trade-offs that have to be made is critical in gaining some degree of public support for long term coastal decision-making. We conclude that scenario-based stakeholder engagement is a useful tool to facilitate coastal management planning that takes into account the complexities and challenges of climate change, and could be used in conjunction with existing approaches such as the Shoreline Management Planning process.     

Strategic Environmental Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options in the Canadian Agricultural Sector

This article presents a methodological framework for strategic environmental assessment (SEA) application. The overall objective is to demonstrate SEA as a systematic and structured policy, plan, and program (PPP) decision support tool. In order to accomplish this objective, a stakeholder-based SEA application to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policy options in Canadian agriculture is presented. Using a mail-out impact assessment exercise, agricultural producers and nonproducers from across the Canadian prairie region were asked to evaluate five competing GHG mitigation options against 13 valued environmental components (VECs). Data were analyzed using multi-criteria and exploratory analytical techniques. The results suggest considerable variation in perceived impacts and GHG mitigation policy preferences, suggesting that a blanket policy approach to GHG mitigation will create gainers and losers based on soil type and associate cropping and on-farm management practices. It is possible to identify a series of regional greenhouse gas mitigation programs that are robust, socially meaningful, and operationally relevant to both agricultural producers and policy decision makers. The assessment demonstrates the ability of SEA to address, in an operational sense, environmental problems that are characterized by conflicting interests and competing objectives and alternatives. A structured and systematic SEA methodology provides the necessary decision support framework for the consideration of impacts, and allows for PPPs to be assessed based on a much broader set of properties, objectives, criteria, and constraints whereas maintaining rigor and accountability in the assessment process.     

Changing the Course of Rivers in an Asian City: Linking Landscapes to Human Benefits through Iterative Modeling and Design

Concerns over water scarcity, climate change, and environmental health risks have prompted some Asian cities to invest in river rehabilitation, but deciding on the end goals of rehabilitation is a complex undertaking. We propose a multidisciplinary framework linking riparian landscape change to human well‐being, providing information relevant to decision makers, in a format that facilitates stakeholder involvement. We illustrate this through a case study of the densely settled, environmentally degraded, and flood prone Ciliwung River flowing through metropolitan Jakarta, Indonesia. Our methodology attempts to respond to this complexity through an iterative approach, strongly based on conceptualization and mathematical modeling. Nested hydrologic, hydrodynamic, and water quality models provide outputs at catchment‐, corridor‐, and localized site‐scales. Advanced 3‐D landscape modeling is used for procedural design and precise visualization of proposed changes and their impacts, as predicted by the mathematical models. Finally, participatory planning and design methods allow us to obtain critical stakeholder feedback in shaping a socially acceptable approach. Our framework aims at demonstrating that a change in paradigm in river rehabilitation is possible, and providing future scenarios that balance concerns over flooding, water quality, and ecology, with the realities of a rapidly growing megacity.     

A critical investigation of evaluation matrices to inform coastal adaptation and planning decisions at the local scale

Local governments are under pressure to tackle an increasing spectrum of complex contemporary problems, such as climate change, while ensuring multiple stakeholder interests are incorporated into decision processes. Multi-criteria decision tools can assist, but challenges remain in creating an enabling environment for incorporating and balancing different stakeholder perspectives. Here, we draw on interview data and a sensitivity analysis to investigate the use of an evaluation matrix to guide local coastal adaptation decision-making in South Africa. We adopt a participatory action research framework and find that decision-making is influenced by individual, departmental and institutional values that are not adequately captured in the matrix approach. Our study reveals the compromise between achieving broad stakeholder representation and utilising technical expertise, and that altering matrix assumptions can imply different decision outcomes. Suggestions are made to improve multi-criteria decision approaches to better facilitate integrated coastal management in responding to local coastal adaptation challenges.     

Evaluation Criteria for Implementation of a Sustainable Sanitation and Wastewater Treatment System at Jiuzhaigou National Park, Sichuan Province, China

The administration of Jiuzhaigou National Park in Sichuan Province, China, is in the process of considering a range of upgrades to their sanitation and wastewater treatment systems. Their case history involves an ongoing series of engineering design flaws and management failures. The administration of the Park identified sustainability, environmental protection, and education goals for their sanitation and wastewater treatment system. To meet the goal of sustainability, environmental and economic concerns of the Park’s administration had to be balanced with socio-cultural needs. An advanced reconnaissance method was developed that identified reasons for previous failures, conducted stakeholder analysis and interviews, determined evaluation criteria, and introduced innovative alternatives with records of successful global implementations. This evaluation also helped the Park to better define their goals. To prevent future failures, the administration of the Park must commit to a balanced and thorough evaluation process for selection of a final alternative and institute effective long-term management and monitoring of systems. In addition, to meet goals and achieve energy efficient, cost-effective use of resources, the Park must shift their thinking from one of waste disposal to resource recovery. The method and criteria developed for this case study provides a framework to aid in the successful implementation of sanitation projects in both underdeveloped and developed areas of the world, incorporating socio-cultural values and resource recovery for a complex group of stakeholders.