IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v34y2014i4d10.1007_s10669-014-9525-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate and other scenarios disrupt priorities in several management perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Haowen You

    (University of Virginia)

  • Elizabeth B. Connelly

    (University of Virginia)

  • James H. Lambert

    (University of Virginia)

  • Andres F. Clarens

    (University of Virginia)

Abstract

Climate vulnerability and adaptation assessments are increasingly typical of infrastructure agencies. In contrast to global emissions reductions, adaptation decision making tends to occur on smaller geographic scales and nearer time horizons. The supporting analyses are performed by local agencies with relatively sparse data and few resources. Recent efforts of the authors introduced scenario-based preferences to perform risk analysis for these agencies in a single perspective, updating management priorities when climate and non-climate stressors combine. On the other hand, a single perspective fails to account for the complexities of infrastructures, organizations, and stakeholders. Several perspectives should include asset management, project selection, policy-making, demography/geography, research and development, and others. This paper develops a framework to address several management perspectives, finding the implications of climate and other conditions to update agency priorities. The framework is demonstrated for a twenty-year transportation plan with approximately 600 square miles in the mid-Atlantic region of the USA. The demonstration includes that a scenario of climate combined with increased travel demand is relatively more influential across several perspectives, when considering climate both alone and in combination with each of economic recession, wear and tear, and ecosystem stressors.

Suggested Citation

  • Haowen You & Elizabeth B. Connelly & James H. Lambert & Andres F. Clarens, 2014. "Climate and other scenarios disrupt priorities in several management perspectives," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 540-554, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:34:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-014-9525-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-014-9525-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-014-9525-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-014-9525-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Witsanu Attavanich & Bruce A. McCarl & Zafarbek Ahmedov & Stephen W. Fuller & Dmitry V. Vedenov, 2013. "Effects of climate change on US grain transport," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(7), pages 638-643, July.
    2. Ralph L. Keeney, 2012. "Value-Focused Brainstorming," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 303-313, December.
    3. Michelle C. Hamilton & Shital A. Thekdi & Elisabeth M. Jenicek & Russell S. Harmon & Michael E. Goodsite & Michael P. Case & Christopher W. Karvetski & James H. Lambert, 2013. "Case studies of scenario analysis for adaptive management of natural resource and infrastructure systems," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 89-103, March.
    4. P. Kirshen & M. Ruth & W. Anderson, 2006. "Climate’s Long-term Impacts on Urban Infrastructures and Services: The Case of Metro Boston," Chapters, in: Matthias Ruth & Kieran Donaghy & Paul Kirshen (ed.), Regional Climate Change and Variability, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, January.
    6. Matthew J. Schroeder & James H. Lambert, 2011. "Scenario-based multiple criteria analysis for infrastructure policy impacts and planning," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 191-214, February.
    7. Ralph L. Keeney, 1971. "Utility Independence and Preferences for Multiattributed Consequences," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 875-893, August.
    8. Martinez, Lauro J. & Lambert, James H. & Karvetski, Christopher W., 2011. "Scenario-informed multiple criteria analysis for prioritizing investments in electricity capacity expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(8), pages 883-891.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ayedh Almutairi & John P. Wheeler & David L. Slutzky & James H. Lambert, 2019. "Integrating Stakeholder Mapping and Risk Scenarios to Improve Resilience of Cyber‐Physical‐Social Networks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(9), pages 2093-2112, September.
    2. Thomas P. Bostick & Thomas H. Holzer & Shahryar Sarkani, 2017. "Enabling Stakeholder Involvement in Coastal Disaster Resilience Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(6), pages 1181-1200, June.
    3. Almutairi, Ayedh & Collier, Zachary A. & Hendrickson, Daniel & Palma-Oliveira, José M. & Polmateer, Thomas L. & Lambert, James H., 2019. "Stakeholder mapping and disruption scenarios with application to resilience of a container port," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 219-232.
    4. Thorisson, Heimir & Lambert, James H., 2017. "Multiscale identification of emergent and future conditions along corridors of transportation networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 255-263.
    5. Hassler, Madison L. & Andrews, Daniel J. & Ezell, Barry C. & Polmateer, Thomas L. & Lambert, James H., 2020. "Multi-perspective scenario-based preferences in enterprise risk analysis of public safety wireless broadband network," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    6. Heimir Thorisson & James H. Lambert & John J. Cardenas & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Resilience Analytics with Application to Power Grid of a Developing Region," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(7), pages 1268-1286, July.
    7. Vrishali Subramanian & Elena Semenzin & Danail Hristozov & Esther Zondervan-van den Beuken & Igor Linkov & Antonio Marcomini, 2015. "Review of decision analytic tools for sustainable nanotechnology," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 29-41, March.
    8. Al-Mutairi, Ayedh & AlKheder, Sharaf & Alzwayid, Shaikhah & Talib, Dalal & Heji, Mariam Bn & Lambert, James H., 2022. "Scenario-based preferences modeling to investigate port initiatives resilience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Zachary A. Collier & Igor Linkov & James H. Lambert, 2014. "Tools and strategies for climate change decision making," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 471-472, December.
    10. Lam, Juan Carlos & Adey, Bryan T. & Heitzler, Magnus & Hackl, Jürgen & Gehl, Pierre & van Erp, Noel & D'Ayala, Dina & van Gelder, Pieter & Hurni, Lorenz, 2018. "Stress tests for a road network using fragility functions and functional capacity loss functions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 78-93.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rogerson, Ellen C. & Lambert, James H., 2012. "Prioritizing risks via several expert perspectives with application to runway safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 22-34.
    2. Hamilton, Michelle C. & Lambert, James H. & Connelly, Elizabeth B. & Barker, Kash, 2016. "Resilience analytics with disruption of preferences and lifecycle cost analysis for energy microgrids," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-21.
    3. Teng, Kuei-Yung & Thekdi, Shital A. & Lambert, James H., 2012. "Identification and evaluation of priorities in the business process of a risk or safety organization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 74-86.
    4. Prinz, Aloys & Bünger, Björn, 2011. "The usefulness of a Happy Income Index," CAWM Discussion Papers 15, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    5. He, Ying & Huang, Rui-Hua, 2008. "Risk attributes theory: Decision making under risk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 243-260, April.
    6. Prinz, Aloys & Bünger, Björn, 2012. "Balancing ‘full life’: An economic approach to the route to happiness," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 58-70.
    7. KARRI PASANEN & MIKKO KURTTILA & JOUNI PYKÄlÄINEN & JYRKI KANGAS & PEKKA LESKINEN, 2005. "Mesta — Non-Industrial Private Forest Owners' Decision-Support Environment For The Evaluation Of Alternative Forest Plans Over The Internet," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(04), pages 601-620.
    8. Gerd Gigerenzer, 1997. "Bounded Rationality: Models of Fast and Frugal Inference," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 133(II), pages 201-218, June.
    9. Shuang Liu & Kirsten Maclean & Cathy Robinson, 2019. "A cost-effective framework to prioritise stakeholder participation options," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(3), pages 221-241, November.
    10. Khaled, Oumaima & Minoux, Michel & Mousseau, Vincent & Michel, Stéphane & Ceugniet, Xavier, 2018. "A multi-criteria repair/recovery framework for the tail assignment problem in airlines," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 137-151.
    11. Zhang, Tianyu & Dong, Peiwu & Zeng, Yongchao & Ju, Yanbing, 2022. "Analyzing the diffusion of competitive smart wearable devices: An agent-based multi-dimensional relative agreement model," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 90-105.
    12. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    13. Anirban Basu & William Dale & Arthur Elstein & David Meltzer, 2009. "A linear index for predicting joint health‐states utilities from single health‐states utilities," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 403-419, April.
    14. Chorus, Caspar & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Sobhani, Anae & Szép, Teodóra, 2021. "Obfuscation maximization-based decision-making: Theory, methodology and first empirical evidence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 28-44.
    15. Wu, Desheng (Dash) & Lee, Chi-Guhn, 2010. "Stochastic DEA with ordinal data applied to a multi-attribute pricing problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1679-1688, December.
    16. Perrels, Adriaan & Molarius, Riitta & Porthin, Markus & Rosqvist, Tony, 2008. "Testing a Flood Protection Case by Means of a Group Decision Support System," Discussion Papers 449, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    17. Fernandez del Pozo, J. A. & Bielza, C. & Gomez, M., 2005. "A list-based compact representation for large decision tables management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(3), pages 638-662, February.
    18. Mario Fedrizzi & Michele Fedrizzi & R. A. Marques Pereira, 2007. "Consensus Modelling In Group Decision Making: Dynamical Approach Based On Fuzzy Preferences," New Mathematics and Natural Computation (NMNC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 219-237.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1255-1286 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Ahrens, Heinz & Kantelhardt, Jochen, 2007. "Integrating Ecological And Economic Aspects In Land Use Concepts: Some Conclusions From A Regional Land Use Concept For Bayerisches Donauried," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7986, Agricultural Economics Society.
    21. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:34:y:2014:i:4:d:10.1007_s10669-014-9525-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.