A new collaborative methodology for assessment and management of ecosystem services

Forests

Volumn 6, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 1696-1720

  Segura, Marina ^a   Maroto, Concepción ^a   Belton, Valerie ^b   Ginestar, Concepción ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

AHP; Collaborative management; Ecosystem services assessment; Multiple criteria decision analysis; Natural resource management; PROMETHEE

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; DISASTERS; ECOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT; OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

AHP; COLLABORATIVE MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS; NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; PROMETHEE;

ECOSYSTEMS;

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; DECISION ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; NATURAL RESOURCE; PROTECTED AREA; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; STAKEHOLDER;

EID: 84930669591     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19994907     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/f6051696     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Lockwood, M.; Worboys, G.; Kothari, A. Managing Protected Areas: A Global Guide, 1st ed.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2006.
2. Fitzsimons, F.; Pearson, C.J.; Lawson, C.; Hill, M.J. Evaluation of land-use planning in greenbelts based on intrinsic characteristics and stakeholder values. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 106, 23-34, doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.01.012.
3. Kijazi, M.H.; Kant, S. Social acceptability of alternative forest regimes in Mount Kilimanjaro, Tanzania, using stakeholder attitudes as metrics of uncertainty. For. Policy Econ. 2011, 13, 242-257, doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.12.001.
4. Mustajoki, J.; Saarikoski, H.; Marttunen, M.; Ahtikoski, A.; Hallikainen, V.; Helle, T.; Hyppönen, M.; Jokinen, M.; Naskali, A.; Tuulentie, S. Use of decision analysis interviews to support the sustainable use of the forests in Finnish Upper Lapland. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 92, 1550-1563, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.007.
5. Palacios-Agundez, I.; Casado-Arzuaga, I.; Madariaga, I.; Onaindia, M. The Relevance of Local Participatory Scenario Planning for Ecosystem Management Policies in the Basque Country, Northern Spain. Ecol. Soc. 2013, 18, 7, doi:10.5751/ES-05619-180307.
6. Tompkins, E.L.; Few, R.; Brown, K. Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: Incorporating stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88, 1580-1592, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.07.025.
7. Apostolopoulou, E.; Drakou, E.G.; Pediaditi, K. Participation in the management of Greek Natura 2000 sites: Evidence from a cross-level analysis. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 113, 308-318, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.09.006.
8. Liu, J.; Ouyang, Z.; Miao, H. Environmental attitudes of stakeholders and their perceptions regarding protected area-community conflicts: A case study in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91, 2254-2262, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.06.007.
9. Rees, S.E.; Attrill, M.J.; Austen, M.C.; Mangi, S.C.; Rodwell, L.D. A thematic cost-benefit analysis of a marine protected area. J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 114, 476-485, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.10.048.
10. Reed, M.S. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 2417-2431, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.
11. Mendoza, G.A.; Martins, H. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. For. Ecol. Manag. 2006, 230, 1-22, doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2006.03.023.
12. De Brucker, K.; Macharis, C.; Verbeke, A. Multi-criteria analysis and the resolution of sustainable development dilemmas: A stakeholder management approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2013, 224, 122-131, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.02.021.
13. Hockings, M.; Stolton, S.; Leverington, F.; Dudley, N.; Courrau, J. Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland Cambridge, UK, 2006.
14. Petrokofsky, G.; Brown, N.D.; Heremy, G.E. A participatory process for identifying and prioritizing policy-relevant research questions in natural resource management: A case study from the UK forestry sector. Forestry 2010, 83, 357-367, doi:10.1093/forestry/cpq018.
15. Maroto, C.; Segura, M.; Ginestar, C.; Uriol, J.; Segura, B. Sustainable Forest Management in a Mediterranean region: Social preferences. For. Syst. 2013, 22, 546-558, doi:10.5424/fs/2013223-04135.
16. Segura, M.; Ray, D.; Maroto, C. Decision support systems for forest management: A comparative analysis and assessment. Comput. Electron. Agr. 2014, 101, 55-67, doi:10.1016/j.compag.2013.12.005.
17. Martinez-Harms, M.J.; Bryan, B.A.; Balvanera, P.; Law, E.A.; Rhodes, J.R.; Possingham, H.P.; Wilson, K.A. Making decisions for managing ecosystem services. Biol. Conserv. 2015, 184, 229-238, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.01.024.
18. Sijtsma, F.J.; van der Heide, C.M.; van Hinsberg, A. Beyond monetary measurement: How to evaluate projects and policies using the ecosystem services framework. Environ. Sci. Policy 2013, 32, 14-25, doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.06.016.
19. Macharis, C.; Springael, J.; De Brucker, K.; Verbeke, A. PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis: Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2004, 153, 307-317, doi:10.1016/S037722 17(03)00153-X.
20. Fontana, V.; Radtke, A.; Bossi Fedrigotti, V.; Tappeiner, U.; Tasser, E.; Zerbe, S.; Buchholz, T. Comparing land-use alternatives: Using the ecosystem services concept to define a multi-criteria decision analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 93, 128-136, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon. 2013.05.007.
21. Turcksin, L.; Bernardini, A.; Macharis, C. A combined AHP-PROMETHEE approach for selecting the most appropriate policy scenario to stimulate a clean vehicle fleet. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2011, 20, 954-965, doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.08.104.
22. Macharis, C.; Turcksin, L.; Lebeau, K. Multi Actor Multi Criteria Analysis (MAMCA) as a tool to support sustainable decisions: State of use. Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 54, 610-620, doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.08.008.
23. Behzadian, M.; Kazemzadeh, R.B.; Albadvi, A.; Aghdasi, M. PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2010, 200, 198-215, doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.021.
24. Huang, I.B.; Keisler, J.; Linkov, I. Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Ten years of applications and trends. Sci. Total Environ. 2011, 409, 3578-3594, doi:10.1016/j. scitotenv.2011.06.022.
25. Ananda, J.; Herath, G. A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 2535-2548, doi:10.1016/j. ecolecon.2009.05.010.
26. Vacik, H.; Kurttila, M.; Hujala, T.; Khadka, C.; Haara, A.; Pykäläinen, J.; Honkakoski, P.; Wolfslehner, B.; Tikkanen, J. Evaluating collaborative planning methods supporting programme-based planning in natural resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 2014, 144, 304-315, doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.029.
27. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2003.
28. Fisher, B.; Kerry Turner, R. Ecosystem services: Classification for valuation. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 1167-1169, doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.02.019.
29. Belton, V.; Stewart, T. Problem Structuring for Multiple Criteria Analysis. In New Trends in Multicriteria Decision Analysis, 1st ed.; Greco, S., Figuiera, R.J., Ehrgott, M., Eds.; Springer International Series in Operational Research and Management Science: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 209-240.
30. Corner, J.; Buchanan, J.; Henig, M. Dynamic decision problem structuring. J. Multi-Crit. Decis. Anal. 2001, 10, 129-141.
31. Keeney, R.L. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making, 1st ed.; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1992.
32. Marques-Pérez, I.; Segura, B.; Maroto, C. Evaluating the functionality of agricultural systems: Social preferences for multifunctional peri-urban agriculture. The " Huerta de Valencia" as case study. Span. J. Agri. Res. 2014, 12, 889-901, doi:10.5424/sjar/2014124-6061.
33. Xu, Z. On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2000, 126, 683-687, doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00082-X.
34. Daellenbach, H.; McNickle, D.; Dye, S. Management Science. Decision-Making through Systems Thinking, 2nd ed.; Palgrave Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 2012.
35. Graham, J.; Amos, B.; Plumptre, T. Governance Principles for Protected Areas in the 21st Century. In Proceedings of the Fifth World Parks Congress, Durban, South Africa, 8-17 September 2003.
36. Banville, C.; Landry, M.; Martel, J.M.; Boulaire, C. A Stakeholder Approach to MCDA. Syst. Res. 1998, 15, 15-32.
37. Harrison, S.R.; Qureshi, M.E. Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multicriteria decision models. Nat. Resour. Forum 2000, 24, 11-19.
38. Scholten, L.; Scheidegger, A.; Reichert, P.; Mauer, M.; Lienert, J. Strategic rehabilitation planning of piped water networks using multi-criteria decision analysis. Water Res. 2014, 49, 124-143, doi:10.1016/j.watres.2013.11.017.
39. Miller, K.A.; Belton, V. Water resource management and climate change adaptation: A holistic and multiple criteria perspective. Mitig. Adapt. Strategies Glob. Chang. 2014, 19, 289-308, doi:10.1007/s11027-013-9537-0.
40. Belton, V.; Stewart, T. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An Integrated Approach, 1st ed.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2002.
41. OECD. The OECD Glossary of Statistical Terms. Available online: http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/(accessed on 10 November 2014).
42. Brans, J.P.; Mareschal, B. PROMETHEE Methods. In Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. State of the Art Surveys, 1st ed.; Figuiera, R.J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., Eds.; Springer International Series in Operational Research and Management Science: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 163-195.
43. Generalitat Valenciana. Parcs Naturals de la Comunitat Valenciana. Available online: http://www.cma.gva.es/webdoc/documento.ashx?id=141553 (accessed on 20 December 2013).
44. RAMSAR. The List of Wetlands of International Importance. Available online: http://www.ramsar.org (accessed on 15 December 2013).
45. De Groot, R.S.; Wilson, M.A.; Boumans, R.M. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecol. Econ. 2002, 41, 393-408, doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7.
46. Costanza, R.; d'Arge, R.; De Groot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; O'Neill, R.V.; Paruelo, J. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Ecol. Econ. 1998, 25, 3-15.
47. PATFOR. Plan de Acción Territorial Forestal de la Comunitat Valenciana. Available online: http://www.cma.gva.es/webdoc/documento.ashx?id=144302 (accessed on 10 December 2013).
48. Tofallis, C. Add or Multiply? A Tutorial on Ranking and Choosing with Multiple Criteria. INFORMS Trans. Edu. 2014, 14, 109-119, doi:10.1287/ited.2013.0124.
49. Saaty, T.L.; Vargas, L.G. Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2001.
50. Saaty, T.L.; Peniwati, K. Group Decision Making: Drawing out and Reconciling Differences; RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2008.
51. Valls-Donderis, P.; Vallés, M.C.; Galiana, F. Criteria and indicators for sustainable forestry under Mediterranean conditions applicable in Spain at the forest management unit scale. For. Syst. 2015, 24, 21, doi:10.5424/fs/2015241-05542.
52. Ananda, J. Implementing Participatory Decision Making in Forest Planning. Environ. Manag. 2007, 39, 534-544, doi:10.1007/s00267-006-0031-2.
53. Macharis, C.; Brans, J.P.; Mareschal, B. The GDSS Promethee procedure. J. Decis. Syst. 1998, 7, 283-307.
54. Mendelsohn, R.; Olmstead, S. The economic valuation of environmental amenities and disamenities: Methods and applications. Annu. Rev. Env. Resour. 2009, 34, 325-347, doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-011509-135201.
55. Wilson, M.A.; Hoehn, J.P. Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: The state-of-the art and science. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 60, 335-342, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.08.015.