Multicriteria Decision Aid to support Multilateral Environmental Agreements in assessing international forestry projects
Tóm tắt
The three Rio Conventions—the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification—face the challenge to create synergies at different levels. The objective of this article is to describe how we have assessed synergies between the Rio Conventions at the project level in the forest sector. Since the complexity of the decision problem is high, we adopted the Multicriteria Decision Aid approach, which can provide a broad insight into the decision problem and find a compromise solution to a problem with multidimensional and conflicting criteria including social, economic and environmental features. The ELECTRE TRI model was used for assessing synergies at the project level, and has been a useful tool to quantify the performance of afforestation and reforestation projects into three categories (synergistic, reasonably synergistic, and not synergistic). For the first time, afforestation and reforestation projects have been assessed in a comprehensive way through decision criteria that reflect global and local interests using a non-compensatory multicriteria method.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Andre, S. (2007). Evaluation of environmental performances for an industrial site: A decision aiding methodology for facilitating the dialogue between stakeholders. Paper presented at the 22nd European Conference on Operational Research, Prague.
Appanah, S. (2003). Restoration of degraded forests as opportunities for development. Paper presented at the International Conference bringing back the forests Policies and Practices for Degraded Lands and Forests, Kuala Lumpur.
Arondel, C., & Girardin, P. (2000). Sorting cropping systems on the basis of their impact on groundwater quality. European Journal of Operational Research, 127, 467–482.
Barbier, E. B., & Markandya, A. (1990). The conditions for achieving environmentally sustainable growth. European Economic Review, 34, 659–669.
Barker, T., Bashmakov, I., Bernstein, L., Bogner, J. E., Bosch, P. R., Dave, R., et al. (2007). Technical summary. In B. Metz, O. R. Davidson, P. R. Bosch, R. Dave, & L. A. Meyer (Eds.), Climate change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Bouyssou, D. (1990). Building criteria: A prerequisite for MCDA. In Bana & C. A. Costa (Ed.) Readings in multiple criteria decision aid (pp. 58–81). Heidelberg: Springer.
Bouyssou, D., Marchant, T., Pirlot, M., Tsoukiàs, A., & Vincke, P. (2006). Evaluation and decision models with multiple criteria. Stepping stones for the analyst (English). In: International series in operations research & management science (Vol. 86, 445 pp.). New York: Springer.
Caparrós, A., & Jacquemont, F. (2003). Conflicts between biodiversity and carbon sequestration programs: Economic and legal implications. Ecological Economics, 46, 143–157.
Cóndor, R. D. (2008). Multicriteria decision framework: Assessing synergies among the Rio Conventions at forestry project level. Dissertation, Università degli Studi della Tuscia.
Cóndor, R. D., Scarelli, A., & Valentini, R. (2009). L’approccio multicriteri come strumento di supporto decisionale in ambito forestale. Forest@ Rivista di Selvicoltura ed Ecologia Forestale, 6(1), 161–172. doi:10.3832/efor0579-006.
Corbera, E., Kosoy, N., & Martinez Tuna, M. (2007). Equity implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas and rural communities: Case studies from Meso-America. Global Environmental Change, 17, 365–380.
Dietz, S., & Neumayer, E. (2007). Weak and strong sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and measurement. Ecological Economics, 61, 617–626.
Figueira, J., Mousseau, V., & Roy, B. (2005). ELECTRE methods. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art survey (pp. 133–162). New York: Springer. http://www.diazdesantos.es/libros/figueiraj-multiple-criteria-decision-analysis-state-of-the-art-surveys-L0010572110940.html
Global Environmental Facility—GEF. (2004). A conceptual design tool for exploiting interlinkages between the focal areas of the GEF. A report focusing on the needs of the Global Environment Facility. Scientific and Technical Advisory Panel of the GEF: Washington DC. Retrieved November 2007, from http://www.clacc.net/Documents/report/STAP%20report.pdf.
Guitouni, A., & Martel, J. M. (1998). Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. European Journal of Operational Research, 109, 501–521.
Halsnæs, K., & Markandya, A. (2002). The CDM and sustainable development: Case studies from Brazil and India. In A. Markandya & K. Halsnæs (Eds.), Climate change and sustainable development. Prospects for developing countries (pp. 247–283). London: Earthscan.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—IPCC. (2002). Climate change and biodiversity. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Technical Paper.
International Union for Conservation of Nature—IUCN. (2005). NCSA as a mechanism to achieve synergies among Rio Conventions by Bhujang Dharmaji. BIOLOG Newsletter of the Regional Biodiversity Programme, Asia. Vol. 5 No 1 May 2005. Retrieved August 2006, from http://ncsa.undp.org/site_documents/iuvn_biolog.pdf.
Kangas, J., & Kangas, A. (2005). Multiple criteria decision support in forest management—the approach, methods applied, and experiences gained. Forest Ecology and Management, 207, 133–143.
Kangas, A., Kangas, J., & Pykäläinen, J. (2001). Outranking methods as tools in strategic natural resources planning. Silva Fennica, 35(2), 215–227. Retrieved September 2007, from http://www.metla.fi/silvafennica/full/sf35/sf352215.pdf.
Klooster, D., & Masera, O. (2000). Community forest management in Mexico: Carbon mitigation and biodiversity conservation through rural development. Global Environmental Change, 10, 259–272.
Kowalski, K., Stagl, S., Madlener, R., & Omann, I. (2009). Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 1063–1074.
Madlener, R., Henggeler Antunes, C., & Dias, L. C. (2009). Assessing the performance of biogas plants with multi-criteria and data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 197, 1084–1094.
Martinez-Alier, J., Munda, G., & O’Neill, J. (1998). Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 26, 277–286.
Masera, O. R., Ceron, A. D., & Ordonez, A. (2001). Forestry mitigation options for Mexico: Finding synergies between national sustainable development priorities and global concerns. Mitigation and adaptation strategies for climate change. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 6, 291–312.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment—MA. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Desertification synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Mousseau, V., Figueira, J., Dias, L., Gomes da Silva, C., & Clímaco, J. (2003). Resolving inconsistencies among constraints on the parameters of an MCDA model. European Journal of Operational Research, 147, 72–93.
Mousseau, V., & Slowinski, R. (1998). Inferring an ELECTRE TRI model from assignment examples. Journal of Global Optimization, 12, 157–174.
Mousseau, V., Slowinski, R., & Zielniewicz, P. (1999). ELECTRE TRI 2.0a Methodological guide and user’s documentation. Document LAMSADE no.111, Université de Paris-Dauphine.
Mousseau, V., Slowinski, R., & Zielniewicz, P. (2000). A user-oriented implementation of the ELECTRE-TRI method integrating preference elicitation support. Computers & Operations Research, 27, 757–777.
Munda, G. (1997). Environmental economics, ecological economics and the concept of sustainable development. Environmental Values, 6(2), 213–233.
Munda, G. (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis and sustainable development. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys (pp. 954–958). New York: Springer.
Nelson, K. C., & de Jong, B. H. J. (2003). Making global initiatives local realities: Carbon mitigation projects in Chiapas, Mexico. Global Environmental Change, 13, 19–30.
Norese, M. F., & Viale, S. (2002). A multi-profile sorting procedure and its use in the public administration. European Journal of Operational Research, 138(2), 365–379.
Olsen, K. H. (2007). The clean development mechanism’s contribution to sustinable development: A review of the literature. Climatic Change, 84, 59–73.
Olsen, K. H., & Fenhann, J. (2008). Sustainable development benefits of clean development mechanisms projects. A new methodology for sustainability assessment based on text analysis of the project design documents submitted for validation. Energy Policy, 36, 2819–2830.
Rennings, K., & Hohmeyer, O. (1997). Linking weak and strong sustainability indicators: The case of global warming. Discussion paper No. 97-11E. Zentrum für Eurpaische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW)/ Center for European Economic Research. Retrieved July 2009, from http://opus.zbw-kiel.de/volltexte/2008/7132/pdf/dp1197.pdf.
Rousval, B. (2005). Aide multicritere a l’evaluation de l’impact des transports sur l’environnement. Dissertation, Lamsade Université Paris IX Dauphine.
Roy, B. (2005). Paradigms and challenges. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys (pp. 3–24). New York: Springer.
Roy, B., & Bouyssou, D. (1993). Aide multicritère à la décision: Mèthodes et cas. Paris: Economica, Collection Gestion.
Sell, J., Koellner, T., Weber, O., Pedroni, L., & Scholz, R. W. (2006). Decision criteria of European and Latin American market actors for tropical forestry projects providing environmental services. Ecological Economics, 58, 17–36.
Siskos, Y., Grigoroudis, E., Krassadaki, E., & Matsatsinis, N. (2007). A multicriteria accreditation system for information technology skills and qualifications. European Journal of Operational Research, 182, 867–885.
Smith, J., & Scherr, S. J. (2002). Forest carbon and local livelihoods: Assessment of opportunities and policy recommendations. Center for International Forestry Research: Indonesia. Retrieved September 2006, from http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-037.pdf.
Srinivasa Raju, K., Duckstein, L., & Arondel, C. (2000). Multicriterion analysis for sustainable water resources planning: A case study in Spain. Water Resources Management, 14, 435–456.
Stamelos, I., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2003). Software evaluation problem situations. European Journal of Operational Research, 145, 273–286.
Sutter, C., & Parreño, J. C. (2007). Does the current clean development mechanism (CDM) deliver its sustainable development claim? An analysis of officially registered CDM projects. Climatic Change, 84, 75–90.
Totten, M., Panda, S. I., & Janson-Smith, T. (2003). Biodiversity, climate, and the kyoto protocol: Risks and opportunities. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1(5), 262–270. Retrieved August 2006, from http://www.jstor.org/pss/3868014.
Tsoukiàs, A. (2007). On the concept of decision aiding process: An operational perspective. Annals of Operations Research, 54, 3–27.
Umweltbundesamt—UBA. (2001). Requirements of climate protection with regards to the quality of ecosystems: Use of synergies between the framework convention of climate change and the convention on biological diversity. Prepared by A. Herold, U. Eberle, Ch. Ploetz and S. Scholz. German Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin: Germany. Retrieved August 2006, from www.biodiv-chm.de/Documents/1057778062/download.
Umweltbundesamt—UBA. (2004a). Integration of biodiversity concerns in climate change. A toolkit. Developed by Keya Choudhury, Cornelia Dziedzioch, Andreas Häusler and Christiane Ploetz. German Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin: Germany. Retrieved September 2006, from http://www.umweltdaten.de/medien-e/biodiv.pdf.
Umweltbundesamt—UBA. (2004b). Suitable instruments for integrating biodiversity considerations in climate change mitigation activities, particularly in the land use and energy sector. Prepared by K. Choudhury, C. Dziedzioch, A. Häusler and C. Ploetz. German Federal Environmental Agency, Berlin: Germany. Retrieved September 2006, from http://www.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/2788.pdf.
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification/Convention on Biological Diversity—UNCCD/CBD. (2004). Workshop on Forests and Forest Ecosystems: Promoting synergy in the implementation of the three Rio conventions, Final Report, 5–7 April 2004, Viterbo, Italy.
United Nations Environment Programme/Convention on Biological Diversity—UNEP/CBD. (2004). Identifying and promoting synergies through forests and forests ecosystems. Note by the Executive Secretariat. A background paper prepared by Robert Nasi, Ken MacDicken, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) (UNEP/CBD/WS-For-Syn/INF/1; 20 March 2004).
United Nations Environment Programme/Convention on Biological Diversity—UNEP/CBD. (2005). Report of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice on the work of its Eleventh Meeting (UNEP/CBD/COP/8/3; 19 December 2005).
United Nations Environment Programme/Convention on Biological Diversity—UNEP/CBD. (2007). Biodiversity and Climate Change. Proposal from the Executive Secretary on options for mutually supportive activities for the secretariats of the Rio conventions, and options for parties and relevant organizations. Note by the Executive Secretary (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/7; 5 November 2007).
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change—UNFCCC. (2002). Cooperation with relevant international organizations. Cross-cutting thematic areas and activities under the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, Convention on Biological Diversity and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Note by the secretariat (FCCC/SBSTA/2002/INF.16; 11 October 2002).
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change—UNFCCC. (2004). Options for enhanced cooperation among the three Rio Conventions. Note by the secretariat (FCCC/SBSTA/2004/INF.19; 2 November 2004).
United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies—UNU-IAS. (2004). UNU-IAS Report. Inter-linkages approach for wetland management: The case of the pantanal wetland, November 2004, 28 pp.
Velasquez, J., Piest, U., & Mougeot, J. (2002). Pacific Island Countries case study. Inter-linkages: Synergies and coordination among multilateral environmental agreements. Tokyo, Japan: United Nations University.
Vincke, P. (1992). Multicriteria decision aid. UK: West Sussex.
World Bank. (2005). Social analysis guidelines in natural resource management. Incorporating social dimensions in to Bank-supported projects. Washington, DC: Social Development Department, World Bank.
Yu, W. (1992). Aide multicritère à la décision dans le cadre de la problématique du tri: Méthodes et applications. Dissertation, Université Paris-Dauphine.