Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management

• Published in: Ecological economics Vol. 84; pp. 110 - 120
• Main Authors: Garmendia, Eneko, Gamboa, Gonzalo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier B.V 01-12-2012
• Subjects: Basque Country; Basques; Case studies; Checks; Complex systems; Compression; Ecology; Economics; Environmental economics; Estuaries; Europe; Incommensurability of values; Natural resources; Natural resources management; Participatory multi-criteria evaluation; Preferences; Priorities; Quality assurance; Quality control; Resource management; Sensitivity analysis; Social preferences; Southern Europe; Sustainability; Sustainable development; Weights; ANE, Spain, Pais Vasco, Viscaya, Urdaibai Estuary; ANE, Europe; Participatory multi-criteria evaluation; Weights; Complex systems; Incommensurability of values; Social preferences
• ISSN: 0921-8009; 1873-6106
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.09.004

The use of multi-criteria evaluation tools in combination with participatory approaches provides a promising framework for integrating multiple interests and perspectives in the effort to provide sustainability. However, the inclusion of diverse viewpoints requires the “compression” of complex issues, a process that is controversial. Ensuring the quality of the compression process is a major challenge, especially with regards to retaining the essential elements of the various perspectives. Based on the lessons learned during a case study that assessed sustainable management options for the Urdaibai Estuary (Basque Country-Southern Europe), we propose a process in which the explicit elicitation of weights (the prioritisation of criteria) within a participatory multi-criteria evaluation serves as a quality assurance mechanism to check the robustness of the evaluation process. The results demonstrate that diverse individual priorities can be grouped in a reduced set of social preferences by means of cluster analysis reinforced with a deliberative appraisal among a wide variety of social actors. The approach presented retains relevant information regarding extreme and sometimes irreconcilable positions, allows an explicit social sensitivity analysis of the MCE process, and enables participants to learn from and reflect upon diverse social preferences without forcing their consensus.
► We show how to deal with weights without forcing consensus or searching a single aggregated parameter. ► Individual preferences are aggregated by mutual consent to ensure that the process is legitimised and socially accepted. ► Coping with powerful social-actors and respecting the diversity of perspectives is central to the framework of our approach. ► By defining weights in a deliberative manner we enhance the robustness of the analysis from a ‘social’ perspective. ► The elicitation of weights also serves to address common and conflicting areas and, to foster a social learning process.