INTEGRATING ECOSYSTEM SERVICES INTO ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENT MANAGEMENT OPTIONS IN A PROTECTED AREA: A DELIBERATE MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS APPROACH
Keywords:
AL-Prespa, protected area, multi-criteria evaluation method, deliberative process, stakeholders, citizen’s juryAbstract
Nature provides us with the very essentials of life. It gives us clean air and water; enables us to produce and gather food,
fuel and raw materials from the land and sea; regulates our climate; stems flood waters and it filters pollution. It also gives us
personal benefits from enjoying it that increases our health and happiness. Collectively, these benefits are known as ecosystem
services. Wetlands provide people with a wide range of benefits. Prespa Park is a good case study, as it is a wetland area of high
biodiversity and long human history. It is situated in the Balkan Peninsula and is shared among the three neighboring countries
Albania, FYR of Macedonia and Greece. A study to obtain information concerning ecosystem services issues in the Albanian
part of Prespa Park (AL-Prespa) basin, south-eastern Albania, was conducted from 2008-2010. The main aim of the study was
providing an assessment of services coming from a range of AL-Prespa ecosystems, and benefits of the services under different
management options. In this study, the problem of how to address and solve the complex issues of assessing ecosystem
services is addressed, using a public participation process aided by multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method. The main
elements of the approach presented in this paper are: an inventory process to focus on sets of ecosystem services in AL-Prespa,
and the development of specific management practices for management of ecosystems services in AL-Prespa. The next step
in the process used an options analysis approach to look at the highly ranked issues and services in more detail. This approach
presents an important tool in an analysis of ecosystem services and is essential for identifying and prioritizing the relative
importance of the services by ecosystems in a protected area.
References
Bana e Costa, C., 1990. Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Bennett, J., 1999. Estimating the Values of Environmental Impacts of Agriculture. Country Matters Conference. Bureau of Rural Sciences.
Bojorquez-Tapia, L. A., Sanchez-Colon S. and A. F. Martinez, 2005. Building consensus in environmental impact assessment through multicriteria modeling and sensitivity analysis. Environmental Management, 36 (3): 469-481.
Brans, J. P. and B. Mareschal, 1990. The PROMETHEE methods for MCDM: The PROMCALC, GAIA and BANKADVISER software. In: C. A. Bana e Costa, (Editor), Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Carson, L., and B. Marrtin, 2002. Random selection of citizens for technological decision making. Science and Public Policy, 29 (2): 105-113.
Constanza, R., d’Arge, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., Oneill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P. and M. van den Belt, 1997. The value of world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387 (6630): 253–260.
Cook, D. C. and W. L. Proctor, 2007. Assessing the threat of exotic plant pests. Ecological Economics, 63 (2-3): 594-604.
Daily, G. E., 1997. Nature’s Services – Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington.
Cork, S. J. and D. Shelton, 2000. The nature and value of Australia’s ecosystem services: A framework for sustainable environmental solutions. In: Sustainable environmental solutions for industry and government. Environmental Engineering Society, Queensland Chapter, The Institution of Engineers, Australia, Queensland Division, and Queensland Chamber of Commerce and Industry, pp. 151-159.
Cork, S. J., Shelton, D., et al., 2001. A framework for applying the concept of Ecosystem Services to Natural Resource Management. Third Australian Stream Management Conference, Brisbane.
Crosby, N., Kelly, J. M. and P. Schaefer, 1986. Citizens’ panels: a new approach to citizen participation. Public Administration Review, 46 (2): 170-178.
Dillman, D. A., 2007. Mail and internet survey - The tailored design method (2nd edition, 2007 update with new Internet, visual, and mixed-mode guide). John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
Fink, A., 2006. How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (3rd Edition). Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.
Gal, T., T. Stewart and T. Hanne, 1999. Multi-criteria Decision Making - Advances in MCDM models, algorithms, theory and applications. Kluwer, New York.
Hajkowicz, S. and K. Collins, 2007. A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management. Water Resources Management, 21 (9): 1553-1566.
Hill, M. J., Braaten, R., Lees, B., Veitch, S. M. and S. Sharma, 2005. Multi-criteria decision analysis in spatial decision support: the ASSESS analytic hierarchy process and the role of quantitative methods and spatially explicit analysis. Environmental Modeling and Software, 20: 955–976.
Kiker, G. A., T. S. Bridges et al., 2005. Application of multicriteria decision analysis in environmental decision making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 1: 91-108.
Klauer, B., M. Drechsler and F. Messner, 2002. Multi-criteria analysis under uncertainty with IANUS – method and empirical results. UFZ Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig.
Kleinman, D. L., 2000. Science, Technology and Democracy. State University of New York Press, Albany.
Malczewski, J., 2006. GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 20: 703–726.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Current State and Trends. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Mendoza, G. A. and H. Martins, 2006. Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modeling paradigms. Forest Ecology and Management, 230 (1-3): 1-22.
Munda, G., 1995. Multi-criteria Evaluation in a Fuzzy Environment. Physica, Heidelberg.
Nardi, P. M., 2006. Doing Survey Research: A Guide to Quantitative Methods (2nd Edition). Pearson Education Inc., Boston, MA.
O’Neill, C., 2001. Understanding the impact of participation in a deliberative process: A social learning approach to citizens’ juries. Developments in Public Participation and Innovations in Community Governance Conference, held at Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, 7–9 June.
Pagiola, S., K. von Ritter et al., 2004. Assessing the Economic Value of Ecosystem Conservation. Washington D.C., World Bank.
Pretty, J. and B. R. Frank, 2000. Participation and social capital formation in natural resource management: Achievements and lessons. International Landcare 2000: Changing Landscapes, Shaping Futures, pp. 178–188. Landcare, Melbourne, Australia.
Proctor, W., 2001. Valuing Australia’s Ecosystem Services Using a Deliberative Multi-Criteria Approach. In: European Society for Ecological Economics, Frontiers 1 Conference: Fundamental Issues of Ecological Economics. Cambridge, UK.
Proctor, W. and M. Drechsler, 2003. Deliberative multi-criteria evaluation: A case study of recreation and tourism options in Victoria. In: European Society for Ecological Economics Frontiers II Conference, Tenerife, Canary Islands.
Proctor, W. and M. Drechsler, 2006. Deliberative multicriteria evaluation. Environmental Planning C: Government Policy, 24 (2): 169–190.
Rauschmayer, F. and H. Wittmer, 2006. Evaluating deliberative and analytical methods for the resolution of environmental conflicts. Land Use Policy, 23 (1): 108–122.
Ross, H., M. Buchy and W. Proctor, 2002. Laying down the ladder: A typology of public participation in Australian resource management. Australian Journal of Environmental Management, 9: 205–217.
Smith, G. and C. Wale, 2000. Citizens’ Juries and Deliberative Democracy. Political Studies, 48 (1): 51–65.
Sterman, J. D., 2000. Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Irwin McGraw–Hill, Boston.
van den Hove, S., 2000. Participatory approaches to environmental policymaking: The European Commission Climate Policy Process as a case study. Ecological Economics, 33: 457–472.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
