Advertisement

Deliberative Decisions and Formal Multicriteria Analysis: Addressing Nortons Skepticism

  • Sahotra SarkarEmail author
Chapter
Part of the The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics book series (LEAF, volume 26)

Abstract

Norton has argued for the salience of deliberative strategies for making environmental decisions which is supposed to be preferable to formal decision analysis. This paper argues that formal multicriteria decision analysis, when deployed with care, has the flexibility to absorb the advantages of deliberative decision making. It can also be used for decision support during a deliberative process. This feature of decision analysis is illustrated using a case study from Merauke in Papua province of Indonesian New Guinea.

Keywords

Conservation area networks Decision theory Objectives hierarchy Merauke Mulicriteria analysis Systematic conservation planning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The ideas reported here have been developed through discussions over several decades with a large number of collaborators: Jim Dyer, Chris Margules, and Victor Sànchez-Cordero deserve special mention. Laboratory members who have contributed to this work include Trevon Fuller, Justin Garson, Patricia Illoldi-Rangel, Alex Moffett, and Chris Pappas. For Figs. 13.2 and 13.3, thanks are due to Michael Ciarleglio. For comments on an earlier draft thanks are due to Ben Minteer and Bryan Norton.

References

  1. Arrow, K.J., and H. Raynaud. 1986. Social choice and multicriterion decision-making. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Borgerhoff-Mulder, M., and P. Coppolillo. 2004. Conservation: linking ecology, economics and culture. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brechin, S.R., P.R. Wilshusen, C.L. Fortwangler, and P.C. West. 2002. Beyond the square wheel: Toward a more comprehensive understanding of biodiversity conservation as social and political process. Society and Natural Resources 15: 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Callicott, J.B., L.B. Crowder, and K. Mumford. 1999. Current normative concepts in conservation. Conservation Biology 13: 22–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ciarleglio, M., J.W. Barnes, and S. Sarkar. 2009a. ConsNet: New software for the selection of conservation area networks with spatial and multi-criteria analyses. Ecography 32: 205–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ciarleglio, M., O. Wang, and S. Sarkar. 2009b. Area prioritization for medco concession in merauke: Report to conservation international. Report—Technical Note 63. Austin: Biodiversity and Biocultural Conservation Laboratory, University of Texas.Google Scholar
  7. Ciarleglio, M., J.W. Barnes, and S. Sarkar. 2010. ConsNet—A tabu search approach to the spatially coherent conservation area network design problem. Journal of Heuristics 16: 537–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conservation International. 2010. Optimizing conservation and production—a collaboration between conservation and business. Report. Jakarta: Conservation International-Indonesia.Google Scholar
  9. Dowie, M. 2009. Conservation refugees: The hundred-year conflict between global conservation and native peoples. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Faith, D.P. 1995. Biodiversity and regional sustainability analysis. Report. Lyneham, ACT: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.Google Scholar
  11. Figuera, J., S. Greco, and M. Ehrgott (eds.). 2005. Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Guha, R. (ed.). 1994. Social ecology. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Keeney, R.L. 2007. Common mistakes in making value tradeoffs. Operations Research 50: 935–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Keeney, R.L. 1992. Value-focused thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Keeney, R.L., and H. Raiffa. 1993. Decisions with Multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs, 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Margules, C.R., and R.L. Pressey. 2000. Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405: 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Margules, C.R., and S. Sarkar. 2007. Systematic conservation planning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Margules, C.R., A.O. Nicholls, and R.L. Pressey. 1988. Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity. Biological Conservation 43: 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McShane, K. 2007. Why environmental ethics shouldn’t give up on intrinsic value. Environmental Ethics 29: 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McShane, T.O., P.D. Hirsch, T.C. Trung, A.N. Songorwa, A. Kinzig, B. Monteferri, D. Mutekanga, H.V. Thang, J.L. Dammert, M. Pulgar-Vidal, M. Welch-Devine, J. Peter Brosius, P. Coppolillo, and S. O’Connor. 2011. Hard choices: Making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biological Conservation 144: 966–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moffett, A., and S. Sarkar. 2007. Incorporating multiple criteria into the design of conservation area networks: A minireview with recommendations. Diversity and Distributions 12: 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moilanen, A., K.A. Wilson, and H. Possingham (eds.). 2009. Spatial conservation prioritization: Quantitative methods and computational tools. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Norton, B.G. (ed.). 1986. The preservation of species. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Norton, B.G. 1987. Why preserve natural variety?. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Norton, B.G. 2003. Defining biodiversity: Do we know what we are trying to save? Namkoong Family Lecture Series. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Department of Forestry.Google Scholar
  26. Norton, B.G. 2005. Sustainability: A philosophy of adaptive ecosystem management. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pressey, R.L., and M.C. Bottrill. 2009. Approaches to landscape- and seascape-scale conservation planning: Convergence, contrasts and challenges. Oryx 43: 464–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rothley, K.D. 1999. Designing bioreserve networks to satisfy multiple, conflicting demands. Ecological Applications 9: 741–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Saaty, T. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Sarkar, S. 2005. Biodiversity and environmental philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sarkar, S. 2012a. Complementarity and the selection of nature reserves: Algorithms and the origins of conservation planning, 1980–1995. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 66: 397–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sarkar, S. 2012b. Environmental philosophy: From theory to practice. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  33. Sarkar, S. 2014. Biodiversity and systematic conservation planning for the twenty-first century: A philosophical perspective. Conservation Science 2: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sarkar, S. 2017. Approaches to biodiversity. In Routledge handbook of philosophy of biodiversity, ed. J. Garson, A. Plutynski, and S. Sarkar, 43–55. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Sarkar, S., and J. Garson. 2004. Multiple criterion synchronization for conservation area network design: The use of non-dominated alternative sets. Conservation and Society 2: 433–448.Google Scholar
  36. Sarkar, S., and P. Illoldi-Rangel. 2010. Systematic conservation planning: An updated protocol. Natureza & Conservação 8: 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sarkar, S., J.S. Dyer, C. Margules, M. Ciarleglio, N. Kemp, G. Wong, D. Juhn, and J. Supriatna. 2017. Developing an objectives hierarchy for multi-criteria decisions on land use options, with a case study of biodiversity conservation and forestry production from Papua, Indonesia. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 44: 464–485.Google Scholar
  38. Sarkar, S., N.C. Parker, J. Garson, A. Aggarwal, and S. Haskell. 2000. Place prioritization for Texas using GAP data: The use of biodiversity and environmental surrogates within socioeconomic constraints. Gap Analysis Program Bulletin 9: 48–50.Google Scholar
  39. Sarkar, S., R.L. Pressey, D.P. Faith, C.R. Margules, T. Fuller, D.M. Stoms, A. Moffett, K. Wilson, K.J. Williams, P.H. Williams, and S. Andelman. 2006. Biodiversity conservation planning tools: Present status and challenges for the future. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 31: 123–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Takacs, D. 1996. The Idea of Biodiversity: Philosophies of Paradise. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Vermeulen, S., and I. Koziell. 2002. Integrating global and local values: A review of biodiversity assessment. Report. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departments of Philosophy and Integrative BiologyUniversity of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  2. 2.Presidency UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations