Multi-criteria decision analysis in adaptation decision-making: a flood case study in Finland

Porthin, Markus; Rosqvist, Tony; Perrels, Adriaan; Molarius, Riitta

doi:10.1007/s10113-013-0423-9

Cited by 31 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Primary data (from document reviews, interviews or focus groups) are required to identify the range of options. MCDA is useful when decisions involve uncertainty but need to be made quickly (Kiker et al 2005;Scheuer et al 2011;Porthin et al 2013;Sahin et al 2013;Munaretto et al 2014) Cost-benefit and costeffectiveness analysis…”

Section: Impactsresponsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communities and change in the anthropocene: understanding social-ecological vulnerability and planning adaptations to multiple interacting exposures

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of vulnerability and adaptation scholarship, policies and programs focus exclusively on climate change or global environmental change. Yet, individuals, communities and sectors experience a broad array of multi-scalar and multi-temporal, social, political, economic and environmental changes to which they are vulnerable and must adapt. While extensive theoreticaland increasingly empirical-work suggests the need to explore multiple exposures, a clear conceptual framework which would facilitate analysis of vulnerability and adaptation to multiple interacting socioeconomic and biophysical changes is lacking. This review and synthesis paper aims to fill this gap through presenting a conceptual framework for integrating multiple exposures into vulnerability analysis and adaptation planning. To support applications of the framework and facilitate assessments and comparative analyses of community vulnerability, we develop a comprehensive typology of drivers and exposures experienced by coastal communities. Our results reveal essential elements of a pragmatic approach for localscale vulnerability analysis and for planning appropriate adaptations within the context of multiple interacting exposures. We also identify methodologies for characterizing exposures and impacts, exploring interactions and identifying and prioritizing responses. This review focuses on coastal communities; however, we believe the framework, typology and approach will be useful for understanding vulnerability and planning adaptation to multiple exposures in various social-ecological contexts.

show abstract

Section: Impactsresponsesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communities and change in the anthropocene: understanding social-ecological vulnerability and planning adaptations to multiple interacting exposures

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 2, most of the reviewed studies have applied a technical decision-making approach, combining different kinds of qualitative and quantitative information, and all of them have included multiple criteria in the evaluation process to tackle the complexity of the adaptation problem. Even though societal decision-making approaches are preferred in principle when the issues at stake are highly complex, technical decision making is useful when there is no need to include the public because the issues are predominantly technical and/or resources are scarce (see, e.g., Porthin et al 2013). In fact, although technical evaluations are generally inexpensive-apart from gathering information with ad hoc surveys, the application of societal multicriteria methods is usually resource-, data-, and timeintensive (Rauschmayer andWittmer 2006, Qin et al 2008).…”

Section: Participatory Multicriteria Methods and Their Relevance For mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As discussed, this approach is also suggested in climate adaptation decisions. For instance, Porthin et al (2013) indicate the flexibility of those responding to the principle of scalability of constructions. For example, coastal protection or water storage infrastructure can be designed to allow for midterm adjustments to more severe storms and floods.…”

Section: Adaptive Governance and Its Relevance For Climate Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participatory multicriteria methods (PMCM) have been identified as suitable decision support tools for the prioritization of adaptation options, the application of which is growing in different contexts (see, e.g., Qin et al 2008, Reeder and Ranger 2011, United Nations Climate Change Secretariat 2011, United Nations Environment Programme 2011, Haque et al 2012, Viguié and Hallegatte 2012, Porthin et al 2013. These methods help decision makers to evaluate and choose among alternative options that are ranked based on multiple criteria and stakeholder preferences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Integrating adaptive governance and participatory multicriteria methods: a framework for climate adaptation governance

Munaretto

Siciliano²,

Turvani³

2014

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Climate adaptation is a dynamic social and institutional process where the governance dimension is receiving growing attention. Adaptive governance is an approach that promises to reduce uncertainty by improving the knowledge base for decision making. As uncertainty is an inherent feature of climate adaptation, adaptive governance seems to be a promising approach for improving climate adaptation governance. However, the adaptive governance literature has so far paid little attention to decisionmaking tools and methods, and the literature on the governance of adaptation is in its infancy in this regard. We argue that climate adaptation governance would benefit from systematic and yet flexible decision-making tools and methods such as participatory multicriteria methods for the evaluation of adaptation options, and that these methods can be linked to key adaptive governance principles. Moving from these premises, we propose a framework that integrates key adaptive governance features into participatory multicriteria methods for the governance of climate adaptation.

show abstract

“…While the methodologies have some limitations (e.g., only address a single hazard type), they provide a reasonable starting point for this activity. Additional methodologies, such as multicriteria decision analysis [e.g., see Gregory and Keeney 1994;Porthin et al 2013;Scrieciu et al 2014;Wardekker et al 2016] and other optimization techniques where multiple criteria are simultaneously optimized, also provide useful support for prioritization. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1190GB-13…”

Section: Collaboration Of Infrastructure Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guide Brief 13 - Resilience Gaps - Identifying and Prioritizing Closure of Resilience Gaps

NIST¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Guide Brief aims to assist collaborative planning teams withStep 4, Plan Development, by supporting communities in identifying resilience gaps using the performance goals tables. These performance goals focus on system function rather than individual component performance. The document discusses approaches to prioritize actions that address those gaps and/or mitigation measures to close those gaps. Both are essential aspects of developing an overall resilience plan.The intended user of this Guide Brief is an analyst or resilience planning team member who helps set priorities for the overall community or for a specific building cluster or infrastructure system. Section 2 illustrates an example of using performance goals tables to identify resilience gaps. A performance goals table for buildings or infrastructure systems can be used in the same way. Section 3 discusses considerations for evaluating various alternatives for closing resilience gaps. Section 4 discusses three methods for prioritizing resilience gaps that communities can apply. IntroductionThe first step in developing a community resilience plan is identifying the gaps between the anticipated performance and the desired performance of building clusters and supporting infrastructure systems. This step is followed by prioritizing mitigation and recovery approaches to address those gaps.After resilience gaps are prioritized based on the importance of the gaps themselves, adjustments may need to be made to the list of priorities based on additional criteria. For example, if a mitigation measure is very expensive, the gap may move down the list of priorities. Additionally, the feasibility and practicality of the solutions may also affect the prioritization.While there is no single correct way to approach this task, this Guide Brief reviews a number of possible approaches, considering such concepts as:Economic, social, and environmental elements When the improvement would affect the restoration and recovery process https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1190GB-13How existing assets may influence decisionsThe overall importance of the infrastructure in meeting critical needs of the community (particularly in post-event circumstances).The Riverbend example in Chapter 9 of the Guide develops a number of gap closure projects, all of which are carried forward in that example. Completing all the proposed projects may be possible, but prioritization is always an important aspect of community resilience planning. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Economic Decision Guide for Buildings and Infrastructure Systems (EDG) [Gilbert et al. 2015] investigates two competing Riverbend bridge mitigation approaches from an economic perspective. Identify Resilience GapsThis section provides an example of identifying a resilience gap (desired versus anticipated performance) by inspecting the completed performance goals table and comparing desired goals with anticipated performance using one infrastructure system, the wastewater system.

show abstract

Multi-criteria decision analysis in adaptation decision-making: a flood case study in Finland

Cited by 31 publications

References 8 publications

Communities and change in the anthropocene: understanding social-ecological vulnerability and planning adaptations to multiple interacting exposures

Communities and change in the anthropocene: understanding social-ecological vulnerability and planning adaptations to multiple interacting exposures

Integrating adaptive governance and participatory multicriteria methods: a framework for climate adaptation governance

Guide Brief 13 - Resilience Gaps - Identifying and Prioritizing Closure of Resilience Gaps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About