4.7 Article

Information preferences for the evaluation of coastal development impacts on ecosystem services: A multi-criteria assessment in the Australian context

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 173, 期 -, 页码 141-150

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.01.025

关键词

Analytic hierarchy process; Australia; Coastal development; Ecosystem services assessment; Information preferences; Multi-criteria analysis

资金

  1. Marine Biodiversity Hub of the Australian Government's National Environmental Research Program
  2. CSIRO Wealth from Ocean flagship
  3. Australian Fisheries Research Development Corporation (FRDC project) [2008/306]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ecosystem based management requires the integration of various types of assessment indicators. Understanding stakeholders' information preferences is important, in selecting those indicators that best support management and policy. Both the preferences of decision-makers and the general public may matter, in democratic participatory management institutions. This paper presents a multi-criteria analysis aimed at quantifying the relative importance to these groups of economic, ecological and socio-economic indicators usually considered when managing ecosystem services in a coastal development context. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is applied within two nationwide surveys in Australia, and preferences of both the general public and decision-makers for these indicators are elicited and compared. Results show that, on average across both groups, the priority in assessing a generic coastal development project is for the ecological assessment of its impacts on marine biodiversity. Ecological assessment indicators are globally preferred to both economic and socio-economic indicators regardless of the nature of the impacts studied. These results are observed for a significantly larger proportion of decision-maker than general public respondents, questioning the extent to which the general public's preferences are well reflected in decision-making processes. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据