An integrated decision-support approach in prioritizing risks of non-indigenous species in the face of high uncertainty
When evaluating the risks of future invasions, we often have sparse information on the likelihood that a species will arrive, establish and spread in a new environment, and on the potential impacts should this occur. Conventional risk assessment, therefore, is limited in providing guidance in managing the risk of non-indigenous species (NIS). However, risk management decisions must be made facing these uncertainties to avoid high and irreversible impacts. We develop an integrated ecological economic modeling and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation (DMCE) approach to support group decision-making in risk prioritization, using an example of ten NIS that could potentially impact Australian plant industries. This innovative approach seeks to combine the advantages of dynamic modeling with the benefits of DMCE in assessing and communicating uncertainty. The model unveils the complexity of the socio-ecological system of biological invasion, with a scenario analysis designed to interactively communicate scientific uncertainty to decision-makers. The DMCE provides a structured approach to identifying stakeholders' key concerns in addressing economic, social, and environmental dimensions of NIS risk explicitly. Functioning as a platform for risk communication, the DMCE also offers an opportunity for diverse views to enter the decision-making process and for the negotiation of consensus consensuses.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid & Madlener, Reinhard & Omann, Ines, 2009. "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1063-1074, September.
- Richard D. Horan & Charles Perrings & Frank Lupi & Erwin H. Bulte, 2002. "Biological Pollution Prevention Strategies under Ignorance:The Case of Invasive Species," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1303-1310.
- Wendy Proctor & Martin Drechsler, 2006. "Deliberative multicriteria evaluation," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 24(2), pages 169-190, April.
- Pimentel, David & Zuniga, Rodolfo & Morrison, Doug, 2005. "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 273-288, February.
- T. D. Stanley, 2005. "Beyond Publication Bias," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 309-345, 07.
- Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
- John Hey & Gianna Lotito & Anna Maffioletti, 2010.
"The descriptive and predictive adequacy of theories of decision making under uncertainty/ambiguity,"
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,
Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 81-111, October.
- John D Hey & Gianna Lotito & Anna Maffioletti, 2008. "The Descriptive and Predictive Adequacy of Theories of Decision Making Under Uncertainty/Ambiguity," Discussion Papers 08/04, Department of Economics, University of York.
- Simberloff, Daniel, 2006. "Risk Assessments, Blacklists, and White Lists for Introduced Species: Are Predictions Good Enough to Be Useful?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(01), pages 1-10, April.
- Robert E. Goodin & Simon J. Niemeyer, 2003. "When Does Deliberation Begin? Internal Reflection versus Public Discussion in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51, pages 627-649, December.
- Ajzen, Icek & Brown, Thomas C. & Rosenthal, Lori H., 1996. "Information Bias in Contingent Valuation: Effects of Personal Relevance, Quality of Information, and Motivational Orientation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 43-57, January.
- Simberloff, Daniel, 2006. "Risk Assessments, Blacklists, and White Lists for Introduced Species: Are Predictions Good Enough to Be Useful?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(1), April.
- Howley, Peter & Hynes, Stephen & O'Donoghue, Cathal, 2010. "The citizen versus consumer distinction: An exploration of individuals' preferences in Contingent Valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1524-1531, May.
- Rodríguez-Labajos, Beatriz & Binimelis, Rosa & Monterroso, Iliana, 2009. "Multi-level driving forces of biological invasions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 63-75, November.
- Cook, David & Proctor, Wendy, 2007. "Assessing the threat of exotic plant pests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 594-604, August.
- T. D. Stanley, 2001. "Wheat from Chaff: Meta-analysis as Quantitative Literature Review," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 131-150, Summer. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)