IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v18y2009i4d10.1007_s10726-008-9148-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Stream Restoration: Potential and Examples

Author

Listed:
  • H. J. Corsair

    (The Johns Hopkins University)

  • Jennifer Bassman Ruch

    (The Johns Hopkins University
    7067 Columbia Gateway Drive)

  • Pearl Q. Zheng

    (The Johns Hopkins University)

  • Benjamin F. Hobbs

    (The Johns Hopkins University)

  • Joseph F. Koonce

    (7067 Columbia Gateway Drive)

Abstract

Within stream restoration practice there has been little use of formal decision analysis methods for evaluating tradeoffs in selecting restoration sites and design alternatives. Restoration planning suffers from poorly defined objectives, confusion of objectives and means, and a lack of consideration of tradeoffs. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods have the potential to improve restoration decision making by quantifying non-economic objectives, communicating tradeoffs, facilitating consistent and explicit valuation, and focusing negotiation on ultimate objectives. To explore the potential usefulness of MCDA, we first review restoration practices and define the characteristics of projects that are good candidates for MCDA. We also present two case studies. The first study is a prioritization of stream reaches for restoration that illustrates how value judgments can affect such decisions. The second study addresses the proposed removal of the Ballville Dam on the Sandusky River in Ohio. An important challenge in the dam removal decision is the linking of habitat improvements to changes in species populations and ecological services that people value. The analysis shows how MCDA can assist decision making by clarifying tradeoffs, in this case by showing that the key issues are conflicts among ecological criteria—not all of which are improved by restoration.

Suggested Citation

  • H. J. Corsair & Jennifer Bassman Ruch & Pearl Q. Zheng & Benjamin F. Hobbs & Joseph F. Koonce, 2009. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Stream Restoration: Potential and Examples," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 387-417, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:18:y:2009:i:4:d:10.1007_s10726-008-9148-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-008-9148-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-008-9148-4
    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/s10726-008-9148-4?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. Prato, Tony, 2003. "Multiple-attribute evaluation of ecosystem management for the Missouri River system," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 297-309, June.
    2. Harri Ehtamo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Pirja Heiskanen & Jeffrey Teich & Markku Verkama & Stanley Zionts, 1999. "Generating Pareto Solutions in a Two-Party Setting: Constraint Proposal Methods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(12), pages 1697-1709, December.
    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. Schuwirth, N. & Reichert, P. & Lienert, J., 2012. "Methodological aspects of multi-criteria decision analysis for policy support: A case study on pharmaceutical removal from hospital wastewater," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(2), pages 472-483.
    2. Mika Marttunen & Jyri Mustajoki, 2018. "Use of Analyst-Generated Stakeholder Preference Profiles in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis — Experiences from an Urban Planning Case," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-29, September.
    3. Femke Bekius & Sebastiaan Meijer & Hugo Thomassen, 2022. "A Real Case Application of Game Theoretical Concepts in a Complex Decision-Making Process: Case Study ERTMS," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 153-185, February.

    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. Guifang Yang & Zhenghong Chen, 2015. "RS-based fuzzy multiattribute assessment of eco-environmental vulnerability in the source area of the Lishui River of northwest Hunan Province, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 78(2), pages 1145-1161, September.
    2. Atousa Soltani & Roberta Dyck & Navid Hossaini & Asish Mohapatra & Kasun Hewage & Rehan Sadiq, 2016. "Human health assessment for remediation technologies (HEART): a multi-criteria decision analysis tool," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 7(2), pages 183-200, June.
    3. Rudolf Vetschera & Michael Filzmoser & Ronald Mitterhofer, 2014. "An Analytical Approach to Offer Generation in Concession-Based Negotiation Processes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 71-99, January.
    4. Heiskanen, Pirja & Ehtamo, Harri & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Constraint proposal method for computing Pareto solutions in multi-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 44-61, August.
    5. I. Linkov & F. K. Satterstrom & G. Kiker & T. P. Seager & T. Bridges & K. H. Gardner & S. H. Rogers & D. A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 61-78, February.
    6. Guoming Lai & Katia Sycara, 2009. "A Generic Framework for Automated Multi-attribute Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 169-187, March.
    7. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 627-639, June.
    8. Paula Sarabando & Luís C. Dias & Rudolf Vetschera, 2013. "Mediation with Incomplete Information: Approaches to Suggest Potential Agreements," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 561-597, May.
    9. Sell, Joachim & Koellner, Thomas & Weber, Olaf & Proctor, Wendy & Pedroni, Lucio & Scholz, Roland W., 2007. "Ecosystem services from tropical forestry projects - The choice of international market actors," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 496-515, January.
    10. Prato, Tony, 2012. "Increasing resilience of natural protected areas to future climate change: A fuzzy adaptive management approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 46-53.
    11. Nicolas Quérou & Patrick Rio & Mabel Tidball, 2007. "Multi-Party Negotiation When Agents Have Subjective Estimates of Bargaining Powers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 417-436, September.
    12. Guoming Lai & Cuihong Li & Katia Sycara, 2006. "Efficient Multi-Attribute Negotiation with Incomplete Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 511-528, September.
    13. Pirja Heiskanen, 2001. "Generating Pareto‐optimal boundary points in multiparty negotiations using constraint proposal method," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 210-225, April.
    14. Harri Ehtamo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 2001. "Interactive Multiple‐Criteria Methods for Reaching Pareto Optimal Agreements in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 475-491, November.
    15. Ehtamo, Harri & Kettunen, Eero & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Searching for joint gains in multi-party negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 54-69, April.
    16. Zhang, Linlan & Song, Haigang & Chen, Xueguang & Hong, Liu, 2011. "A simultaneous multi-issue negotiation through autonomous agents," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 95-105, April.
    17. Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand & Hossein Azadi & Dereje Teklemariam & Ehsan Houshyar & Philippe Maeyer & Frank Witlox, 2019. "Livelihood alternatives model for sustainable rangeland management: a review of multi-criteria decision-making techniques," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 11-36, February.
    18. Ivan Marsa-Maestre & Miguel A. Lopez-Carmona & Juan A. Carral & Guillermo Ibanez, 2013. "A Recursive Protocol for Negotiating Contracts Under Non-monotonic Preference Structures," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-43, January.
    19. Prato, Tony, 2009. "Evaluating and managing wildlife impacts of climate change under uncertainty," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(7), pages 923-930.
    20. Lou, Youcheng & Wang, Shouyang, 2016. "Approximate representation of the Pareto frontier in multiparty negotiations: Decentralized methods and privacy preservation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 968-976.

    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:grdene:v:18:y:2009:i:4:d:10.1007_s10726-008-9148-4. 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.