IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: a case study on sustainable natural resource management

  • Eneko Garmendia
  • Gonzalo Gamboa
Registered author(s):

    The use of multi-criteria evaluation tools in combination with participatory approaches provides a promising framework for integrating multiple interests and perspectives in the effort to provide sustainability. However, the inclusion of diverse viewpoints requires the \"compression\"Â of complex issues, a process that is controversial. Ensuring the quality of the compression process is a major challenge, especially with regards to retaining the essential elements of the various perspectives. In this article, we suggest a process in which the explicit elicitation of weights (i.e., the prioritisation of criteria) within a participatory multi-criteria evaluation serves as a quality assurance mechanism to check the robustness of sustainability integrated assessment processes from a social perspective. We demonstrate this approach using a case study focused on the sustainable management of the Urdaibai Estuary in the Basque Country (Southern Europe). Drawing on the large body of literature on sophisticated mathematical models that help identify and prioritise criteria, this approach allows (1) an explicit \"social sensitivity\"Â analysis despite the incommensurability of values regarding individual or group priorities, and (2) participants to learn from and reflect upon diverse social preferences without forcing their consensus.

    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.

    File URL:
    Our checks indicate that this address may not be valid because: 403 Forbidden. If this is indeed the case, please notify (Sergio Faria)

    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by BC3 in its series Working Papers with number 2012-06.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Aug 2012
    Date of revision:
    Publication status: Published
    Handle: RePEc:bcc:wpaper:2012-06
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Chen, Ting-Yu & Wang, Jih-Chang, 1998. "A weight-assessing method with habitual domains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 342-367, October.
    2. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Alaja, Susanna, 2008. "The threat of weighting biases in environmental decision analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 556-569, December.
    3. Videira, Nuno & Antunes, Paula & Santos, Rui, 2009. "Scoping river basin management issues with participatory modelling: The Baixo Guadiana experience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 965-978, February.
    4. Garmendia, E. & Prellezo, R. & Murillas, A. & Escapa, M. & Gallastegui, M., 2010. "Weak and strong sustainability assessment in fisheries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 96-106, November.
    5. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 79-92, June.
    6. Richard B. Howarth & Matthew A. Wilson, 2006. "A Theoretical Approach to Deliberative Valuation: Aggregation by Mutual Consent," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 1-16.
    7. Gamboa, Gonzalo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2007. "The problem of windfarm location: A social multi-criteria evaluation framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1564-1583, March.
    8. Kobrich, C. & Rehman, T. & Khan, M., 2003. "Typification of farming systems for constructing representative farm models: two illustrations of the application of multi-variate analyses in Chile and Pakistan," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 141-157, April.
    9. Santos, Rui & Antunes, Paula & Baptista, Gualter & Mateus, Pedro & Madruga, Luisa, 2006. "Stakeholder participation in the design of environmental policy mixes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 100-110, November.
    10. 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.
    11. O'Hara, Sabine U., 1996. "Discursive ethics in ecosystems valuation and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 95-107, February.
    12. Norton, Bryan & Costanza, Robert & Bishop, Richard C., 1998. "The evolution of preferences: Why 'sovereign' preferences may not lead to sustainable policies and what to do about it," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 193-211, February.
    13. Katrin Borcherding & Thomas Eppel & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1991. "Comparison of Weighting Judgments in Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(12), pages 1603-1619, December.
    14. Garmendia, Eneko & Stagl, Sigrid, 2010. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1712-1722, June.
    15. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2009. "A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2535-2548, August.
    16. Giampietro, Mario & Mayumi, Kozo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2006. "Integrated assessment and energy analysis: Quality assurance in multi-criteria analysis of sustainability," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 59-86.
    17. Antunes, Paula & Kallis, Giorgos & Videira, Nuno & Santos, Rui, 2009. "Participation and evaluation for sustainable river basin governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 931-939, February.
    18. Giuseppe Munda, 2003. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation (SMCE)," UHE Working papers 2003_04, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2006. "Social multi-criteria evaluation of different development scenarios of the Aysen region, Chile," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 157-170, August.
    22. Stefan Hajkowicz & Geoff McDonald & Phil Smith, 2000. "An Evaluation of Multiple Objective Decision Support Weighting Techniques in Natural Resource Management," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 505-518.
    23. 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.
    24. Paul J. H. Schoemaker & C. Carter Waid, 1982. "An Experimental Comparison of Different Approaches to Determining Weights in Additive Utility Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 182-196, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bcc:wpaper:2012-06. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sergio Faria)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.