Rethinking the economist’s evaluation toolkit in light of sustainability policy

References

• Abdalla, C., Roach, B., & Epp, D. 1992. Valuing environmental quality changes using averting expenditures: an application to groundwater contamination. Land Economics 68(2):163–169.
   Google Scholar
• Abrishamchi, A., Ebrahimian, A., Tajrishi, M., & Marino, M. 2005. Case study: application of multicriteria decision making to urban water supply. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 131(4):326–335.
   Google Scholar
• Adamowicz, W. 2004. What’s it worth? An examination of historical trends and future directions in environmental valuation. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 48(3):419–444.
   Google Scholar
• Bennet, J. 2005. Australasian environmental economics: contributions, conflicts and cop-outs. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 49(3):243–261.
   Google Scholar
• Brans, J., Vincke, P., & Marshal B. 1986. How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research 24(2):228–238.
   Google Scholar
• Brauers, W. 2004. Optimization Methods for a Stakeholder Society: A Revolution in Economic Thinking by Multi-Objective Optimization. Boston, MA: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Brouwer, R. & van Ek, R. 2004. Integrated ecological, economic and social impact assessment of alternative flood control policies in the Netherlands. Ecological Economics 50(1–2):1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Carson, R., Mitchell, R., Hanemann, M., Kopp, R., Presser, S., & Ruud, P. 2003. Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental and Resource Economics 25(3):257–286.
   Google Scholar
• Chen W., Hong, H., Liu, Y., Zhang, L., Hou, X., & Raymond, M. 2004. Recreation demand and economic value: An application of travel cost method for Xiamen Island. China Economic Review 15(4):398–406.
   Google Scholar
• Cullen. R., Fairburn, G., & Hughey, K. 2001. Measuring the productivity of threatened species programs. Ecological Economics 39(1):53–66.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, P. & Hausman, J. 1994. Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(4):45–64.
   Google Scholar
• Drummond, M., O’Brien, B., Stoddart, G., & Torrance, G. 1997. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Healthcare Programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Dunning, D., Ross, Q., & Merkhofer, M. 2000. Multiattribute utility analysis for addressing Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Environmental Science and Policy 3(S1):7–14.
   Google Scholar
• Eckenrode, R. 1965. Weighting multiple criteria. Management Science 12(3):180–192.
   Google Scholar
• Eder, G., Duckstein, L., & Nachtnebel, H. 1997. Ranking water resource projects and evaluating criteria by multicriterion Q-analysis: an Austrian case study. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 6(5):259–271.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, W. & Barron, F. 1994. SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 60(3):306–325.
   Google Scholar
• Fernandes, L., Ridgley, M., & van’t Hof, T. 1999. Multiple criteria analysis integrates economic, ecological and social objectives for coral reef managers. Coral Reefs 18(4):393–402.
   Google Scholar
• Figueira, J., G. Salvatore, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.). 2005a. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Figueira, J., Mousseau, V., & Roy, B. 2005b. ELECTRE methods. In J. Figueira, G. Salvatore, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. pp. 133– 162. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gershon, M. & Duckstein, L. 1983. Multiobjective approaches to river basin planning. Journal of the Water Resources Planning and Management 109(1):13–28.
   Google Scholar
• Hajkowicz, S., McDonald, G., & Smith, P. 2000. An evaluation of multiple objective decision support weighting techniques in natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43(4):505–518.
   Google Scholar
• Hajkowicz, S. 2003. Allocating environmental funds amongst regions: Fairness, efficiency and transparency. In E. Beriatos, C. Brebbia, H. Coccossis, & A. Kungolos (Eds.), Sustainable Planning and Development. pp. 169–187. Wessex: WIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hajkowicz, S. & Young, M. 2005. Costing yield loss from acidity, sodicity and dryland salinity to Australian agriculture. Land Degradation and Development 16(5):417–433.
   Google Scholar
• Hammond, J., Keeney, R., & Raiffa, H. 1998. Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayashi, K. 2000. Multicriteria analysis for agricultural resource management: A critical survey and future perspectives. European Journal of Operational Research 122(2):486–500.
   Google Scholar
• Heilman, P., Yakowitz, D., & Lane, L. 1997. Targeting farms to improve water quality. Applied Mathematics and Computation 83(2–3):173–194.
   Google Scholar
• Howard, A. 1991. A critical look at multiple criteria decision making techniques with reference to forestry applications. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 21(4):1649–1659.
   Google Scholar
• Hyde, K., Maier, H., & Colby, C. 2004. Reliability-based approach to multicriteria decision analysis for water resources. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 130(6):429– 438.
   Google Scholar
• Janssen, R. 2001. On the use of multi-criteria analysis in environmental impact assessment in The Netherlands. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 10(2):101–109.
   Google Scholar
• Joubert, A., Leiman, A., de Klerk, H., Katau, S., & Aggenbach, J. 1997. Fynbos vegetation and the supply of water: a comparison of multi-criteria decision analysis and cost benefit analysis. Ecological Economics 22(2):123–140.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas, J., Store, R., Leskinen, P., & Mehtätalo, L. 2000. Improving the quality of landscape ecological forest planning by utilizing advanced decision-support tools. Forest Ecology and Management 132(2–3):157–171.
   Google Scholar
• Keeney, R. & Raiffa, H. 1993. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ludwig, D. 2000. Limitations of economic valuation of ecosystems. Ecosystems 3(1):31–35.
   Google Scholar
• McFadden, D. 1999. Rationality for economists? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 19(1-3):73–105.
   Google Scholar
• Mingers, R. & Rosenhead, J. 2004. Problem structuring methods in action. European Journal of Operational Research 152(3): 530–554.
   Google Scholar
• Ozelkan, E. & Duckstein, L. 1996. Analysing water resources alternatives and handling criteria by multi criterion decision techniques. Journal of Environmental Management 48(1):69–96.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson, L., Tisdell, C., & Lisle, A. 2002. The impact of Noosa National Park on surrounding property values: An application of the hedonic price method. Economic Analysis and Policy 32(2):155–171.
   Google Scholar
• Pohekar, S. & Ramachandran, M. 2004. Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 8:365– 381.
   Google Scholar
• Prato, T. 1999. Multiple attribute decision analysis for ecosystem management. Ecological Economics 30(2):207–222.
   Google Scholar
• Raju, S., Duckstein, L., & Arondel, C. 2000. Multicriterion analysis for sustainable water resources planning: a case study in Spain. Water Resources Management 14(6):435–456.
   Google Scholar
• Ribaudo, M., Hoag, D., Smith, M., & Heimlich, R. 2001. Environmental indices and the politics of the conservation reserve program. Ecological Indicators 1(1):11–20.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, R. & Goodwin, P. 2002. Weight approximations in multiattribute decision models. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 11(6):291–303.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. 2000. Does MODSS offer an alternative to traditional approaches to natural resource management decision making? Australasian Journal of Environmental Management 7(3):170–180.
   Google Scholar
• Romero, C. & Rehman, T. 1987. Natural resource management and the use of multiple criteria decision making techniques: a review. European Review of Agricultural Economics 14(1): 61–89.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, B. 1968. Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). Revue d’information et de Recherche Opérationnelle 8:57–75.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. 1987. The analytic hierarchy process: What it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling 9(3–5):161–176.
   Google Scholar
• Sagar, A. & Najam, A, 1998. The human development index: A critical review. Ecological Economics 25(3):249–264.
   Google Scholar
• Sagoff, M. 1988. The Economy of the Earth: Philosophy, Law, and the Environment. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scheubrein, R. & Zionts, S. 2006. A problem structuring front end for a multiple criteria decision support system. Computers & Operations Research 33(1):18–31.
   Google Scholar
• Schultz, M. 2001. A critique of EPA’s index of watershed indicators. Journal of Environmental Management 62(4):429–442.
   Google Scholar
• Spurgeon, J. 1998. The socio-economic costs and benefits of coastal habitat rehabilitation and creation. Marine Pollution Bulletin 37(8–12):373–382.
   Google Scholar
• Steuer, R. & Na, P. 2003. Multiple criteria decision making combined with finance: A categorized bibliographic study. European Journal of Operational Research 150(3):496–515.
   Google Scholar
• Stoneham, G., Chaudhri, V., Ha, A., & Strappazzon, L. 2003. Auctions for contracts: An empirical examination of Victrorias BushTender trial. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 47(4):477–500.
   Google Scholar
• Strijker D., Sijtsma, F., & Wiersma, D. 2000. Evaluation of nature conservation: An application to the Dutch Ecological Network. Environmental and Resource Economics 16(4):363– 378.
   Google Scholar
• Tecle, A. 1992. Selecting a multicriterion decision making technique for watershed resources management. Water Resources Bulletin 28(1):129–140.
   Google Scholar
• Tol, R. 1996. The damage costs of climate change towards a dynamic representation. Ecological Economics 19(1):67–90.
   Google Scholar
• van Bueren, M. & Bennett, J. 2004. Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 48(1):1–32.
   Google Scholar
• von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. 1944. Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weistroffer, H., Smith, C., & Narula, S. 2005. MCDM software. In J. Figueira, G. Salvatore, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. pp. 989– 1018. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Whittington, D. 2002. Improving the performance of contingent valuation studies in developing countries. Environmental and Resource Economics 22(1–2):323–367.
   Google Scholar
• Zanakis, S., Solomon, A., Wishart, N., & Dublish, S. 1998. Multiattribute decision making: A simulation comparison of selected methods. European Journal of Operational Research 107(3):507–529.
   Google Scholar
• Zeleny, M. 1973. Compromise programming. In J. Cocharane & M. Zeleny (Eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Making. pp. 262–301. Columbia, SC: University of Southern Carolina Press.
   Google Scholar