Combining Expert Judgement and Stakeholder Values with Promethee: A case Study in Contaminated Sediments

Abstract

Management of dredged contaminated sediments can be a contentious, difficult, and expensive task. Because the waterways from which sediments are dredged have multiple uses, competing interests are often brought to bear on any decision. No single best alternative is likely to emerge; different stakeholder groups will prefer different alternatives. This chapter investigates the utility of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) as a tool for incorporating stakeholder values into the decision process, for soliciting public participation, and analyzing novel technological alternatives. An outranking method called PROMETHEE is employed for three reasons. First, the emphasis placed on assessing new technologies — and especially beneficial reuse technologies — requires a method that facilitates introduction of new alternatives at any point during the analysis. Second, outranking methods are conducive to elucidating the contrasting value structures of different stakeholder groups. Third, they are more capable of handling semiquantitative scales (e.g., high, middle, low) than optimization methods such as MAUT or AHP. To illustrate the decision process under development, this chapter presents the results of a case study example involving stakeholders in Dover, New Hampshire concerned with the dredging of the Cocheco River.