IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ssefpa/v8y2016i1p49-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eradicate, contain, or live with it? Collaborating with stakeholders to evaluate responses to invasive species

Author

Listed:
  • Shuang Liu
  • David Cook

Abstract

Significant heterogeneity exists in the public’s preferences and values for protecting agricultural ecosystems against invasive non-native species. Therefore, biosecurity decision-making is akin to conflict management characterised by not only technical, but also environmental, social and economic value judgements of different stakeholders. The key question then, is not whether values should be considered in the decision-making process—they are part of it anyway—but how they should be articulated and incorporated via a formal and structured analysis. In this paper, we propose to use Structured Decision Making (SDM) as a framework to incorporate diverse social values into response planning and management and demonstrate its use with three case studies. The first step of the process involves identifying the stakeholders in a response decision, followed by the critical step of systematically translating stakeholders’ major concerns into management objectives. Biosecurity decision-makers will also collaborate with the public to develop response alternatives and identify a preferred option by explicitly making trade-offs among different objectives. Ultimately, the SDM approach provides a transparent description of, and justification for, the response options considered and selected. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and International Society for Plant Pathology 2016

Suggested Citation

  • Shuang Liu & David Cook, 2016. "Eradicate, contain, or live with it? Collaborating with stakeholders to evaluate responses to invasive species," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 49-59, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ssefpa:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:49-59
    DOI: 10.1007/s12571-015-0525-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s12571-015-0525-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12571-015-0525-y?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. Jane Gilmour & Ruth Beilin & Tamara Sysak, 2011. "Biosecurity risk and peri-urban landholders -- using a stakeholder consultative approach to build a risk communication strategy," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 281-295, March.
    2. Touza, Julia & Pérez-Alonso, Alicia & Chas-Amil, María L. & Dehnen-Schmutz, Katharina, 2014. "Explaining the rank order of invasive plants by stakeholder groups," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 330-341.
    3. 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.
    4. Liu, Shuang & Aurambout, Jean-Philippe & Villalta, Oscar & Edwards, Jacqueline & De Barro, Paul & Kriticos, Darren J. & Cook, David C., 2015. "A structured war-gaming framework for managing extreme risks," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 369-377.
    5. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834.
    6. Wendy Proctor & Martin Drechsler, 2006. "Deliberative Multicriteria Evaluation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(2), pages 169-190, April.
    7. Perrings, Charles, 2005. "Mitigation and adaptation strategies for the control of biological invasions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 315-325, February.
    8. Failing, L. & Gregory, R. & Harstone, M., 2007. "Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: A decision-focused approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 47-60, October.
    9. Cook, David & Proctor, Wendy, 2007. "Assessing the threat of exotic plant pests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 594-604, August.
    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. Alan MacLeod & Glyn D. Jones & Helen M. Anderson & Rick A. Mumford, 2016. "Plant health and food security, linking science, economics, policy and industry," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 17-25, February.
    2. Alan MacLeod & Glyn Jones & Helen Anderson & Rick Mumford, 2016. "Plant health and food security, linking science, economics, policy and industry," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 17-25, 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. Shuang Liu & David Cook, 2016. "Eradicate, contain, or live with it? Collaborating with stakeholders to evaluate responses to invasive species," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(1), pages 49-59, February.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Liu, Shuang & Hurley, Michael & Lowell, Kim E. & Siddique, Abu-Baker M. & Diggle, Art & Cook, David C., 2011. "An integrated decision-support approach in prioritizing risks of non-indigenous species in the face of high uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1924-1930, September.
    5. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Hjerppe, Turo & Aapala, Kaisu, 2019. "Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis in valuing peatland ecosystem services—Trade-offs related to peat extraction vs. pristine peatlands in Southern Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 17-28.
    6. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri, 2021. "Valuation through deliberation - Citizens' panels on peatland ecosystem services in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    8. Kenter, Jasper O. & Reed, Mark S. & Fazey, Ioan, 2016. "The Deliberative Value Formation model," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 194-207.
    9. Akin, Darcin & Kara, Derya, 2020. "Multicriteria analysis of planned intercity bus terminals in the metropolitan city of Istanbul, Turkey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 465-489.
    10. Garmendia, Eneko & Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 110-120.
    11. Volker Meyer & Sebastian Scheuer & Dagmar Haase, 2009. "A multicriteria approach for flood risk mapping exemplified at the Mulde river, Germany," 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. 48(1), pages 17-39, January.
    12. Mavrommati, Georgia & Borsuk, Mark E. & Kreiley, Allison I. & Larosee, Christopher & Rogers, Shannon & Burford, Klancey & Howarth, Richard B., 2021. "A methodological framework for understanding shared social values in deliberative valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    13. Eneko Garmendia & Gonzalo Gamboa, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: a case study on sustainable natural resource management," Working Papers 2012-06, BC3.
    14. Terry Walshe & Mark Burgman, 2010. "A Framework for Assessing and Managing Risks Posed by Emerging Diseases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 236-249, February.
    15. Liu, Shuang & Aurambout, Jean-Philippe & Villalta, Oscar & Edwards, Jacqueline & De Barro, Paul & Kriticos, Darren J. & Cook, David C., 2015. "A structured war-gaming framework for managing extreme risks," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 369-377.
    16. 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.
    17. Hardy, Derrylea J. & Patterson, Murray G., 2012. "Cross-cultural environmental research in New Zealand: Insights for ecological economics research practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 75-85.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:ssefpa:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:49-59. 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.