Multi-attribute preference modelling and regional land-use planning

Ecological Economics

Volumn 65, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 325-335

  Ananda, Jayanath ^a   Herath, Gamini ^b  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b DEAKIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Analytic hierarchy process; Australia; Public participation; Regional forest agreement; Stakeholder preferences

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; DECISION MAKING; DISCRETE CHOICE ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; FOREST MANAGEMENT; LAND USE PLANNING; MODELING; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; POLICY MAKING; STAKEHOLDER;

AUSTRALASIA; AUSTRALIA;

EID: 39449116050     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.024     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aczel J., and Saaty T.L. Procedure for synthesising ratio judgments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27 (1983) 93-102
2. Ananda, J., 2004. Multiple Criteria Decision making in Forest Management: An Application to the North East Victoria forest Region in Australia. Ph.D. thesis La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia.
3. Ananda J. Implementing participatory decision making in forest planning. Environmental Management 39 4 (2007) 534-544
4. Ananda J., and Herath G. The use of Analytic Hierarchy Process to incorporate stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning. Forest Policy and Economics 5 1 (2003) 13-26
5. Ananda J., and Herath G. Evaluating public risk preferences in forest land use choices using multi-attribute utility theory. Ecological Economics 55 (2005) 408-419
6. Bouma J., Brouwer R., and van Ek R. The use of integrated assessment methods in Dutch water management: a comparison of cost-benefit and multi-criteria analysis. Third International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, Vienna, 3-6 May (2000)
7. Buchy M., and Hoverman S. Understanding public participation: a review. Forest Policy and Economics 1 (2000) 15-25
8. Coakes S. Valuing the social dimension. Social assessment in the regional forest agreement process. Australian Journal of Environmental Economics 5 (1998) 47-53
9. Commonwealth of Australia. Social Assessment: Northeast Victoria Comprehensive Regional Assessment (1998), Joint Commonwealth and Victorian Regional Forest Agreement Steering Committee, Canberra
10. Commonwealth of Australia. Northeast Victoria Comprehensive Regional Assessment (1999), Joint Commonwealth and Victorian Regional Forest Agreement Steering Committee, Canberra
11. Dargavel J., Proctor W., and Kanowski P. Conflict and agreement in Australian Forests. In: Tacconi L. (Ed). Biodiversity and Ecological Economics: Participation, Values and Resource Management (2000), Earthscan Publications Ltd., London
12. Duke J.M., and Aull-Hyde R. Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process. Ecological Economics 42 (2002) 131-145
13. Dyer J.S., Fishburn P.C., Steur R.E., Wallenius J., and Zionts S. Multiple criteria decision making, multi-attribute utility theory: the next ten years. Management Science 38 5 (1992) 645-654
14. Fischhoff B. Value elicitation: is there anything there?. American Psychologist 46 (1991) 835-847
15. Golden B.L., Wasil E.A., and Harker P.T. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Applications and Studies (1989), Springer -Verlag, Germany
16. Gregory R.S. Valuing environmental options: a case study comparison of multiattribute and contingent valuation survey methods. Land Economics 76 2 (2000) 151-173
17. Gregory R., and Keeney R.L. Creating policy alternatives using stakeholder values. Management Science 40 8 (1994) 1035-1048
18. Hair J.F., Bush R.P., and Ortinau D.J. Marketing Research: a Practical Approach for the New Millennium (2000), McGraw-Hill Publications, Boston 325-368
19. Hajkowicz S. A comparison of multiple criteria analysis and unaided approaches to environmental decision making. Environmental Science and Policy 10 3 (2007) 177-184
20. Harrison S.R., and Qureshi M.E. Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multi-criteria decision models. Natural Resources Forum 24 (2000) 11-19
21. Hayashi K. Multi-criteria analysis for agricultural resource management: a critical survey and future perspectives. European Journal of Operational Research 122 (2000) 486-500
22. Kangas J. A multi-attribute preference model for evaluating the reforestation chain alternatives of a forest stand. Forest Ecology and Management 59 (1993) 271-288
23. Kangas J. An approach to public participation in strategic forest management planning. Forest Ecology and Management 70 (1994) 75-88
24. Kirkpatrick J.B. Nature conservation and the regional forest agreement process. Australian Journal of Environmental Management 5 (1998) 31-37
25. Kline J., and Wichelns D. Public preferences regarding the goals of farmland preservation. Land Economics 70 (1996) 538-549
26. Kurttila M., Pesonen M., Kangas J., and Kajanus M. 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 (2000) 41-52
27. Martin W.E., and Bender H.W. Modeling public land use decisions as a cooperative game. International Journal of Environmental Pollution 12 2/3 (1999) 217-231
28. Martin W.E., Tolwinski B., Shields D.J., and Kent B. An application of social choice theory to US Forest Service decision making. Journal of Policy Modeling 18 6 (1996) 603-621
29. Mau-Crimmins T., de Steiguer J.E., and Dennis D. AHP as a means for improving public participation: a pre-post experiment with university students'. Forest Policy and Economics 7 4 (2005) 501-514
30. Munda G. Conceptualising and responding to complexity. In: Spash C., and Carter C. (Eds). Environmental Valuation in Europe. Policy Research Brief vol. 2 (2000), Cambridge Research for the Environment, Cambridge
31. Omann I. How can multi-criteria decision analysis contribute to environmental policy making? A case study on macro-sustainability in Germany. Third International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, Vienna, Austria, May 3-6 (2000)
32. Ritov I., and Kahnman D. How people value the environment: attitudes versus economic values. In: Bazerman M., Messick D., and Tenbrunsel A. (Eds). Environment, Ethics and Behaviour (1997), New Lexington Press, San Francisco, CA 33-51
33. Rosenberger R.S. Public preferences regarding the goals of farmland preservation programs: comment. Land Economics 74 (1998) 557-565
34. Saaty T.L. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15 (1977) 234-281
35. Saaty T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (1980), McGraw-Hill, New York
36. Saaty T.L. Fundamentals of the analytic hierarchy process. In: Schmoldt D.L., Kangas J.K., Mendoza G.A., and Pesonen M. (Eds). The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making (2001), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 15-35
37. Saaty T.L., and Kearns K.P. Analytical Planning: the Organisation of Systems (1985), Pergamon, Oxford
38. Sagoff M. The Economy of the Earth (1988), The Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
39. Strager M.P., and Rosenberger R.S. Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: weights and measures in spatial MCA. Ecological Economics 58 (2006) 79-92
40. Varis O. The analysis of preferences in complex environmental judgements-a focus on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal of Environmental Management 28 (1989) 283-294
41. Wellstead A.M., Stedman R., and Parkins J.R. Understanding the concept of representation within the context of local forest management decision making. Forest Policy and Economics 5 (2003) 1-11