Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating a Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Decision Support in Water Resources Management

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper we describe a framework for multicriteria modeling and support of multi-stakeholder decision processes. We report on its testing in the development of a new water level management policy for a regulated lake-river system in Finland. In the framework the stakeholders are involved in the decision process from the problem structuring stage to the group consensus seeking stage followed by a stage of seeking public acceptance for the policy. The framework aims at creating an evolutionary learning process. In this paper we also focus on the use of a new interactive method for finding and identifying Pareto-optimal alternatives. Role playing experiments with students are used to test the practical applicability of a negotiation support procedure called the method of improving directions. We also describe the preference programming approach for the aggregation of the stakeholder opinions in the final evaluation of alternatives and consensus seeking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrell, P. J., B. J. Lence, and A. Stam. (1998). “An Interactive Multicriteria Decision Model for Multipurpose Reservoir Management: the Shellmouth Reservoir, ” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 7, 61–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bui, T. X., and M. F. Shakun. (1996). “Negotiation Processes, Evolutionary Systems Design, and NEGOTIATOR, ” Group Decision and Negotiation 5, 339–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davey, A., and D. Olson. (1998). “Multiple Criteria Decision Making Models in Group Decision Support, ” Group Decision and Negotiation 7, 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis, G., and R. B. Gallupe. (1987). “A Foundation for the Study of Group Decision Support Systems, ” Management Science 3, 589–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehtamo, H., R. P. Hämäläinen, P. Heiskanen, J. Teich, M. Verkama, and S. Zionts. (1999). “Generating Pareto Solutions in Two-Party Negotiations by Adjusting Artificial Constraints, ” Management Science 45(12), 1697–1709.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehtamo, H., E. Kettunen, and R. P. Hämäläinen. (2000). “Searching for Joint Gains in Multi-Party Negotiations, ” European Journal of Operational Research (in press).

  • Ehtamo, H., M. Verkama, and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1999). “How to Select Fair Improving Directions in a Negotiation Model over Continuous Issues, ” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part C: Applications and Reviews 29, 26–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, S., L. Simpson, E. Atherton, V. Belton, R. Dawes, W. Edwards, R. P. Hämäläinen, O. Larichev, F. Lootsma, A. Pearman, and C. Vlek. (1998). “Problem Formulation for Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Report of a Workshop, ” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 7, 242–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, K., D. M. Kilgour, and K. W. Hipel. (1994). “Systematic Policy Development to Ensure Compliance to Environmental Regulations, ” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 24(9), 1289–1305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haimes, Y. Y., W. A. Hall, and H. T. Freedman. (1975). Multi-Objective Optimization in Water Resources Systems. Elsevier Scientific Publishing, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiskanen, P., H. Ehtamo, and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1998). “Constraint Proposal Method for Computing Pareto Solutions in n-Party Negotiations, ” European Journal of Operational Research (in press).

  • Hipel, K. W., D. M. Kilgour, L. Fang, and X. Peng. (1997). “The Decision Support System GMCR in Environmental Conflict Management, ” Applied Mathematics and Computation 83, 117–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P. (1988). “Computer Assisted Energy Policy Analysis in the Parliament of Finland, ” Interfaces 18(4), 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P. (1998). Interactive Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis in Water Resources Planning, Home pages of the Lake Päijänne project, http://www.paijanne.hut.fi/.

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and J. Helenius. (1998). WINPRE – Workbench for Interactive Preference Programming v. 1.0, Computer software, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology. (Downloadable at http://www.decisionarium.hut.fi/).

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and R. Kalenius. (1998). Opinions-Online – Platform for Global Participation, Voting, Surveys, and Group Decisions, Computer software, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology. (www.opinions-online.com)

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and E. Kettunen. (1994). “On-Line Group Decision Support by HIPRE 3+ Group Link, ” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, July 11–13, 1994, George Washington University, Washington D.C., 547–557. (Downloadable at http://www.sal.hut.fi/ Publications/pdffiles/ pham94.pdf).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and H. Lauri. (1998). HIPRE 3+ Decision Support Software v. 3.15b, Computer Software, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology. (Distributed by EIA Ltd., Tekniikantie 17b, 02150 Espoo, Finland, Fax: 358-9-7001 8682, Tel: 358-9-7001 8680).

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and O. Leikola. (1995). “Spontaneous Decision Conferencing in Parliamentary Negotiations, ” Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE Computer Society Press 4, 290–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and O. Leikola. (1996). “Spontaneous Decision Conferencing with Top-Level Politicians, ” OR Insight 9(1), 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., M. Lindstedt, and K. Sinkko. (2000). “Multi-Attribute Risk Analysis in Nuclear Emergency Management, ” Risk Analysis 20(4), 455–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and J. Mustajoki. (1998). Web-HIPRE – Java-applet for Value Tree and AHP Analysis, Computer software, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology. (www.hipre.hut.fi).

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and J. Mäntysaari. (1998). “Interactive Spreadsheet Modelling of Regulation Strategies for a Lake-River System, ” Proceedings of the 17th IASTED International Conference on Modelling, Identification and Control, February 18–20, 1998, IASTED-Acta Press, Anaheim, Grindelwald, Switzerland, 181–184. (Downloadable at http://www.sal.hut.fi/Publications/pdf-files/pham98.pdf).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and J. Mäntysaari. (2000). “A Dynamic Interval Goal Programming Approach to the Regulation of a Lake-River System, ” Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (in press).

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., and M. Pöyhönen. (1996). “On-Line Group Decision Support by Preference Programming in Traffic Planning, ” Group Decision and Negotiation 5, 485–500. Hämäläinen, R. P., A. A. Salo, and K. Pöysti. (1991). “Observations about Consensus Seeking in a Multiple Criteria Environment, ” Proceedings of the 25th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE Computer Society Press 4, 190–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L. (1992). Value-Focused Thinking, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, G. E., and S. J. Noronha. (1998). “Rational Agents, Contract Curves, and Inefficient Compromises, ” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans 28(3), 326–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kersten, G. E., and S. J. Noronha. (1999). “Supporting International Negotiation with a WWW-Based System, ” Decision Support Systems 25, 135–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kettunen, E., R. P. Hämäläinen, and E. Ehtamo. (1999). Joint Gains – Negotiation Support in the Internet, Computer Software, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology (www.jointgains.hut.fi).

  • Marttunen, M., and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1995). “Decision Analysis Interviews in Environmental Impact Assessment, ” European Journal of Operational Research 87, 551–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marttunen, M., E. A. Järvinen, J. Saukkonen, and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1999). “Regulation of Lake Päijänne – a Learning Process Preceding Decision-Making, ” Finnish Journal of Water Economy 6, 29–37 (in Finnish).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustajoki, J., and R. P. Hämäläinen. (2000). “Web-HIPRE – A Java Applet for AHP and Value Tree Analysis, ” INFOR Journal 8(3).

  • Pöyhönen, M., and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1998). “Notes on the Weighting Biases in Value Trees, ” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 11, 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pöyhönen, M., and R. P. Hämäläinen. (2000a). “On the Convergence of Multiattribute Weighting Methods, ” European Journal of Operational Research (in press).

  • Pöyhönen, M., and R. P. Hämäläinen. (2000b). “There is Hope in Attribute Weighting, ” INFOR Journal 38(3).

  • Pöyhönen, M., H. C. Vrolijk, and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1997). “Behavioral and Procedural Consequences of Structural Variation in Value Trees, ” European Journal of Operational Research (in press).

  • Raiffa, H. (1982). The Art and Science of Negotiation, Belknap/Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajabi, S., K. W. Hipel, and D. M. Kilgour. (1997). “Multiple Criteria Water Supply Planning, ” Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, October 12–15, 1997, Orlando, Florida, USA, 4, 3484–3489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgley, M. A., D. C. Penn, and L. Tran. (1997). “Multicriterion Decision Support for a Conflict over Stream Diversion and Land-Water Reallocation in Hawaii, ” Applied Mathematics and Computation 83, 153–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salo, A. A. and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1992). “Preference Assessment by Imprecise Ratio Statements, ” Operations Research 40, 1053–1061.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salo, A. A., and R. P. Hämäläinen. (1995). “Preference Programming through Approximative Ratio Comparisons, ” European Journal of Operational Research 82, 458–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salo A. (1995). “Interactive decision aiding for group decision support, ” European Journal of Operational Research 84, 134–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakun, M. E. (1996). “Modeling and Supporting Task-Oriented Group Processes: Purposeful Complex Adaptive Systems and Evolutionary Systems Design, ” Group Decision and Negotiation 5, 305–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tecle, A., B. P. Shrestha, and L. Duckstein. (1998). “A Multiobjective Decision Support System for Multiresource Forest Management, ” Group Decision and Negotiation 7, 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teich, J. E., H. Wallenius, and J. Wallenius. (1994). “Advances in Negotiation Science, ” Yöneylem Arastirmasi Dergisi/Transactions on Operational Research 6, 55–94.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, P.O. Box 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland

    Raimo Hämäläinen

  2. Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, P.O. Box 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland

    Eero Kettunen

  3. Finnish Environment Institute, P.O. Box 140, 00251, Helsinki, Finland

    Mika Marttunen

  4. Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, P.O. Box 1100, 02015 HUT, Finland

    Harri Ehtamo

Authors
  1. Raimo Hämäläinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eero Kettunen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mika Marttunen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Harri Ehtamo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hämäläinen, R., Kettunen, E., Marttunen, M. et al. Evaluating a Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Decision Support in Water Resources Management. Group Decision and Negotiation 10, 331–353 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011207207809

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011207207809

Search

Navigation