Using multi-criteria decision analysis in Natural Resource Management
Gamini Herath & Tony Prato (eds) (2006). Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in Natural Resource Management. Aldershot: Ahsgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-4596-2, 239 pp. Hardback: £56.35.
Reviewed by: Ron Janssen, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
The book starts with a short introduction on the role of multi-criteria decision making in natural resource management. The next 10 chapters describe empirical applications of MCDA in natural resource planning, management and policy analysis for both developing and developed countries. It explains and applies several MCDA approaches designed to assist readers to understand the assumptions, strengths and limitations of alternative approaches.
The book does not specify its intended readership. In my opinion, it is intended for practitioners with a good working knowledge of MCDA and who are interested in issues that arise in the use of these methods in practice.
In addition to the more theoretical works on MCDA, it is useful to have a book that focuses on application issues. Although theoretical research is still going on, this field has arrived at a stage where development is not so much in new methods but in practical issues, such as how to integrate MCDA in participatory processes, how to assess value functions, how to communicate the meaning of weights etc. So, there is definitely scope for a book like this.
Having said this, the set-up of the book is disappointing. In my opinion, it is not much more than a collection of papers, even though some are interesting. If the book is about application issues, I would have expected a list of these issues in chapter one and systematic treatment of them in the following chapters. At present, it is unclear what we are supposed to learn from each of these chapters. This could have been postponed to the concluding chapter, but unfortunately this chapter is limited to general reflections on the use of MCDA in natural resource management, instead of building on the results from the application chapters.
The chapters include a mixture of approaches ranging from standard application of multi attribute utility theory (MAUT) and AHP in chapters 5 and 9, to the use of the PROMETHEE method in Chapter 4 and fuzzy MAUT in Chapter 7. Several chapters describe the combination of participatory tools with MCDA (chapters 3, 4 and 9).
The first application (Chapter 2) describes the use of MAUT for forest management. This chapter is interesting in its description of issues linked to value and weights elicitation.
Advantages and disadvantages of weight assessment using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) are discussed in Chapter 3.
Chapter 4 uses the PROMETHEE method to facilitate the discussion within a group of stakeholders (a citizen's jury) on weights. An initial ranking is used to discuss the range of weights assessed by stakeholders. How this ranking is used to stimulate this discussion remains unclear.
Chapter 5 is a standard application of MAUT. The application shows that including model output in a decision process is not always easy.
Chapter 6 describes how modelling and MCDA can be used to support integration of individual trade-offs and trade-offs at a watershed level.
Fuzzy MCDA has been a promising field for many years. In Chapter 7, the basic concepts fuzzy MAUT are explained and also its potential relevance. However, the actual application is difficult to read, especially to people not familiar with this field. Advantages of the approach compared with standard MAUT do not become clear from this application.
A nice application of AHP to a group decision process is found in Chapter 8. The author addresses the issue of aggregating individual preferences to group preferences from different angles. The use of Saaty's inconsistency index in this process and the presentation of group results is interesting.
Chapter 9 describes a standard application of AHP.
A very novel and potentially very useful approach is described in Chapter 10. The authors of this chapter combine the use of AHP with contingent valuation (CV). First, the overall value is assessed with CV. Next, AHP is used to allocate this total value across the use and non-use values. Keeney and Raiffa (1976) already showed in their famous book that, if we know one value and we know all weights, all values can be assessed. This simple idea requires a very careful interpretation of weights, especially if use and non-use values are combined, as is done here. Unfortunately, the chapter does not elaborate on this issue.
Chapter 11 describes a mixed elimination, ranking approach. The issue of weighing is shifted to the issue of setting constraints, in this case to a minimum stock to be preserved. If no hard constraints can be set on, for example, ecological grounds, setting constraints proves to be as subjective as setting weights. No method to set the constraints is described.
The book concludes with a chapter on the future of MCDA in natural resource management.