Multiple attribute decision analysis for ecosystem management

Implementation of an ecosystem approach to natural resource management requires evaluation of a broad array of ecological services in a multidimensional, community-based watershed approach that empowers people to make informed management decisions. Conventional economic approaches that assign values to ecological services (contingent valuation) or that evaluate the efficiency of preserving and restoring those services (cost–benefit analysis) are quite limited for this purpose. In addition to the methodological difficulties encountered in applying contingent valuation and cost–benefit analysis, several problems occur when nonmarket values of ecological services are estimated independently of ecosystem planning and management. Multiple attribute decision-making (MADM) is an alternative conceptual framework for evaluating and selecting land and water resource management systems (LWRMS). Advantages of MADM are that it facilitates community-based collaborative decision-making, avoids some of the ethical, theoretical and practical shortcomings of conventional economic approaches, does not require assigning monetary values to ecological services, allows consideration of multiple attributes and is not culturally biased. The MADM model described in this paper explains how a property manager selects the most preferred LWRMS for a property based on their multiple stochastic attributes. Application of the model requires determination of the technically feasible LWRMS for a property and specification of the socially acceptable ranges of attributes. This information is combined with economic/biophysical simulations to derive the efficient combination of attributes and LWRMS for a property. The property manager then selects the most preferred combination of attributes from the efficient combinations of attributes for a property using utility maximization, surrogate worth tradeoff, free iterative search, analytical hierarchy process, Aspiration–Reservation Based Decision Support System or stochastic dominance. A watershed alliance can evaluate the sustainability of the most preferred LWRMS for properties in a www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon Abbre6iations: ARBDSS, aspiration–reservation based decision support system; CBA, cost–benefit analysis; CV, contingent valuation; EM, ecosystem management; LWRMS, land and water resource management systems; MADM, multiple attribute decision making; NID, normally independently distributed; WTP, willingness to pay. * Tel.: +1-573-882-0147; fax: +1-573-884-2199. E-mail address: [email protected] (T. Prato) 0921-8009/99/$ see front matter © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0921 -8009 (99 )00002 -6 T. Prato / Ecological Economics 30 (1999) 207–222 208 watershed based on a weak or strong sustainability criterion. If the alliance determines that the most preferred LWRMS are not sustainable, then an index of attributes is used to evaluate the cost effectiveness of alternative public policies for stimulating the adoption of more sustainable LWRMS. © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.