Structured decision-making to link climate change and sustainable development

Wilson, Charlie; McDaniels, Timothy L.

doi:10.3763/cpol.2007.0718

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…to distinguish the ends (fundamental objectives) from the means (Gregory and Keeney 2002). In addition, several objectives hierarchies and sources were reviewed from the literature for ideas about structuring, defining, and measuring the concerns in the reports as objectives (Keeney et al 1987(Keeney et al 1996Keeney 1992;Keeney and Raiffa 1993;Keeney and von Winterfeldt 1994;McDaniels 1999;Winn and Keller 2001;Trousdale and Gregory 2004;McDaniels et al 2006;Wilson and McDaniels 2007;UN 2012). Previously identified criteria for useful fundamental objectives were also used in the final selection phase (Keeney 1992).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying evaluation considerations for the recovery and restoration from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill: An initial appraisal of stakeholder concerns and values

Carriger¹,

Jordan

Kurtz

et al. 2015

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding what can be achieved and what should be avoided by environmental management decisions requires an understanding of values, or what is cared about in a decision. Decision analysis provides tools and processes for constructing objectives that transparently reflect the values being considered in environmental management decisions. The present study demonstrates parts of the initial decision analysis steps for identifying a decision context and constructing objectives for the recovery and long-term restoration of the Gulf of Mexico following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. From a review of multiple reports, including those developed by policy makers and nongovernmental organizations, a preliminary structuring of concerns and considerations into objectives was derived to highlight features of importance in the recovery from the spill and long-term restoration. The fundamental objectives constructed for the long-term restoration context reflect broader concerns regarding well-being and quality of life. When developed through stakeholder engagement processes, clarifying objectives can potentially 1) lend insight into the values that can be affected, 2) meaningfully include stakeholders in the decision-making process, 3) enhance transparency and communication, and 4) develop high-impact management strategies reflecting broad public interests. This article is a US government work and is in the public domain in the United States of America.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying evaluation considerations for the recovery and restoration from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill: An initial appraisal of stakeholder concerns and values

Carriger¹,

Jordan

Kurtz

et al. 2015

Integr Envir Assess & Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Competing factors may dominate in the short term, e.g., economic development for developing nations 6. Given these contextual issues, there is an identified benefit of improving the link between climate change policies and broader sustainable development policies 5,98–100. It is partly from our discussion of the potential of these planning tools for adapting to climate change (Table 2) that we identify three key challenges to spatial planning for adaptation.…”

Section: Spatial Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of spatial planning in adapting to climate change

Hurlimann

March

2012

WIREs Climate Change

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial planning has been identified as a critical mechanism through which climate change adaptation can be facilitated. We review the role of spatial planning as a tool for adaptation to climate change. In doing so, we describe common planning processes and tools. Six capacities of spatial planning that have the potential ability to facilitate climate change adaptation are identified and discussed. These principally relate to spatial planning's ability to: act on matters of collective concern; manage competing interests; cut across scales; reduce and act on uncertainty; act as a knowledge repository; and be oriented to the future while integrating a range of diverse systems. Methods (tools) for planning which have the capacity to address climate change adaptation are presented and discussed. In light of these capacities and acknowledged limitations in planning practice, we identify three key challenges to spatial planning for adaptation: (1) developing conviction;(2) facilitating equitable processes and outcomes; and (3) transforming planning systems from passive to proactive.

show abstract

“…Examples of SDM include decisions pertaining to recreational fisheries (Peterson andEvans 2003, Irwin et al 2008), threatened and endangered species protection (Conroy et al 2008), invasive species management (Runge et al 2011a), migratory bird harvest (Williams and Johnson 1995), wildlife health (Sells et al 2016), and estuarine habitat management (Robinson and Jennings 2012). By breaking the decision into logical components, SDM provides a framework to contend with the complexities of harvest management decisions at large spatial scales, such as creating multiple scales of objectives (McDaniels et al 2006, Wilson andMcDaniels 2007), formally analyzing tradeoffs (Keeney 1992, Gregory andKeeney 1994), and integrating social and ecological data (Gregory et al 1993, McDaniels et al 2006, Failing et al 2007). In addition to these benefits, SDM allows stakeholders to express formally their subjective judgments and preferences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structured decision making as a framework for large‐scale wildlife harvest management decisions

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Fish and wildlife harvest management at large spatial scales often involves making complex decisions with multiple objectives and difficult tradeoffs, population demographics that vary spatially, competing stakeholder values, and uncertainties that might affect management decisions. Structured decision making (SDM) provides a formal decision analytic framework for evaluating difficult decisions by breaking decisions into component parts and separating the values of stakeholders from the scientific evaluation of management actions and uncertainty. The result is a rigorous, transparent, and values-driven process. This decision-aiding process provides the decision maker with a more complete understanding of the problem and the effects of potential management actions on stakeholder values, as well as how key uncertainties can affect the decision. We use a case study to illustrate how SDM can be used as a decisionaiding tool for management decision making at large scales. We evaluated alternative white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) buck-harvest regulations in New York designed to reduce harvest of yearling bucks, taking into consideration the values of the state wildlife agency responsible for managing deer, as well as deer hunters. We incorporated tradeoffs about social, ecological, and economic management concerns throughout the state. Based on the outcomes of predictive models, expert elicitation, and hunter surveys, the SDM process identified management alternatives that optimized competing objectives. The SDM process provided biologists and managers insight about aspects of the buck-harvest decision that helped them adopt a management strategy most compatible with diverse hunter values and management concerns.

show abstract

Structured decision-making to link climate change and sustainable development

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Identifying evaluation considerations for the recovery and restoration from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill: An initial appraisal of stakeholder concerns and values

Identifying evaluation considerations for the recovery and restoration from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill: An initial appraisal of stakeholder concerns and values

The role of spatial planning in adapting to climate change

Structured decision making as a framework for large‐scale wildlife harvest management decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About