Incorporating community objectives in improved wetland management: The use of the analytic hierarchy process

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 70, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 263-273

  Herath, Gamini ^a  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Analytic hierarchy process; Community; Management; Stakeholder; Wonga wetlands

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; DECISION MAKING; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS;

AUSTRALIA; COMMUNITY; ECOLOGICAL BENEFITS; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; ECONOMIC BENEFITS; ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS; SOCIAL BENEFITS; STAKEHOLDER; WETLAND MANAGEMENT; WONGA WETLAND;

WETLANDS;

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; STAKEHOLDER; WETLAND MANAGEMENT;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPLOITATION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; POLICY; SOCIAL ASPECT; WETLAND;

AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA; MURRAY RIVER; VICTORIA [AUSTRALIA];

VICTORIA;

EID: 1342267517     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2003.12.011     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Aczel, J., Saaty, 1983. Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27, 93-102.
2. Assim, F., Hill, C., 1997. Multi-criteria analysis - a tool for wetland management decision making. Paper Presented to the 41st Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Broadbeach, Gold Coast, Queensland.
3. Bennett, B., 2000. Hydrotherapy. Ecos 102, 20-29.
4. Bouma, J., Brouwer, R., Van Ek, R., 2000. The use of integrated assessment methods in Dutch water management: a comparison of cost-benefit and multi-criteria analysis. Paper Presented to the Third International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, May 3-6, Vienna, Austria.
5. Buchy, M., Hoverman, S., 2000. Understanding public participation: a review. Forest Policy and Economics 1, 15-25.
6. Carbone, F., De Montis, A., De Toro, P., Stagl, S., 2000. MCDA methods comparison: environmental policy evaluation applied to a case study in Italy. Paper Presented to the Third International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, May 3-6, Vienna, Austria.
7. Crosby, N., 1996. Creating an authentic voice of the people. Deliberation on democratic theory and practice. Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
8. De Marchi, B., Funtowicz, S., Gough, C., Guimaraes Pereira, A., Rota, E., 1998. The ULYSSES Voyage: Report EUR 17760EN, The ULYSSES Project at the Joint Research Centre, Ispra: European Commission.
9. Deng, J., King, B., Bauer, T., 2002. Evaluating natural attractions for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 29, 422-438.
10. Duke, J.M., Aull-Hyde, R., 2002. Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process. Ecological Economics 42, 131-145.
11. Eastman, R.J., Jiang, H., Toledana, J., 1998. Multi-criteria and multi-objective decision making for land allocation using GIS. In: Beinat, E., Nijkamp, P. (Eds.), Multicriteria Analysis for Land-Use Management, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
12. Gregory, R.S., 2000. Valuing environmental policy options: a case study comparison of multiattribute and contingent valuation survey methods. Land Economics 76, 151-173.
13. Grimble, R., Chan, M.K., 1995. Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries: some practical guidelines for making management more participatory and effective. Natural Resources Forum 19, 113-124.
14. Harrison, S.R., Qureshi, M.E., 2000. Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multi-criteria decision models. Natural Resources Forum 24, 11-19.
15. Kangas, J., 1993. A multi-attribute preference model for evaluating the reforestation chain alternatives of a forest stand. Forest Ecology and Management 59, 271-288.
16. Kangas, J., 1994. Incorporating risk attitudes into comparison of reforestation alternatives. Scandinavian Journal of forest Research 9, 297-304.
17. Keeney, R.L., 1992. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Analysis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
18. Keeney, R.L., Winterfeldt, D.V., Eppel, T., 1990. Eliciting public values for complex policy decisions. Management Science 36, 1011-1030.
19. Kurttila, M., Pesonen, M., Kangas, J., Kajanus, M., 2000. Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis-a hybrid method and its applications to a forest certification case. Forest Policy and Economics 1, 41-52.
20. Lugg, A., 1993. Wetland Management, Guidelines for Local Councils in the Murray Region of NSW. Department of Natural Resources and Management, Sydney.
21. Mawapanga, M.N., Debertin, D.I., 1996. Choosing between alternative farming systems: an application of the analytic hierarchy process. Review of Agricultural Economics 18, 385-401.
22. McDaniels, T.L., Roessler, C., 1998. Multiattribute elicitation of wilderness preservation benefits: a constructive approach. Ecological Economics 27, 299-312.
23. Munda, G., 2000. Conceptualising and responding to complexity. Policy research brief, no. 2. In: Spash, C., Carter, C. (Eds.), Environmental Valuation in Europe, Cambridge Research for the Environment, Cambridge.
24. Omann, I., 2000. How can multi-criteria decision analysis contribute to environmental policy making? A case study on macro-sustainability in Germany. Paper Presented to the Third International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, May 3-6, Vienna, Austria.
25. Peterson, D.L., Silsbee, D.G., Schmoldt, D.L., 1994. A case study of resource management planning with multiple objectives and projects. Environmental Management 18, 729-742.
26. Pressey, R.L., 1986. Wetlands of the River Murray below Lake Hume.
27. Proctor, W., 2000. Laying down the ladder: a typology of public participation in Australian natural resource management. Australian Journal of Environmental Management 9, 205-218.
28. Qureshi, M.E., Harrison, S.R., 2001. A decision support process to compare riparian revegetation options in Scheu Creekcatchment in north Queensland. Journal of Environmental Management 62, 101-113.
29. Resource Assessment Commission, 1992. Multicriteria analysis as an assessment tool. Research Report no. 6, Canberra, Australia.
30. Russell, C., Dale, V., Lee, J., Jensen, M.J., Kane, M., Gregory, R., 2001. Experimenting with multiattribute utility survey methods in a multi-dimensional valuation problem. Ecological Economics 36, 87-108.
31. Saaty, T.L., 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15, 234-281.
32. Saaty, T.L., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York.
33. Turner, K.R., Jeroen, C.J.M., Soderquist, T., Barendregt, A., van Stratten, J., Maltby, E., Van Ierland, E.C., 2000. Ecological-economic analysis of wetlands: scientific integration for management and policy. Ecological Economics 35, 7-23.
34. Varis, O., 1989. The analysis of preferences in complex environmental judgements-a focus on the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Environmental Management 28, 283-294.
35. Wonga Wetlands., 2001. Unpublished Report, Albury City Council, Albury.
36. Wright, P., 1997. Liquid gold: Australia's wetland wealth. Habitat Australia 25, 13-21.