Search results

AbstractAn overview of uncertainty issues associated with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is provided. Further, an explicit understanding of uncertainty (designation, categorization, and quantification) with respect to the methodological properties of the AHP is developed and used to analyse a hypothetical group decision problem located in the context of environmental decision making (EDM). To calculate the numerical impact of especially designed uncertainty scenarios (USs) on the final ranking given by the AHP, a simulation experiment is conducted using R. It evaluates the impact of uncertainty within three variants of a hypothetical decision‐making case by calculating an "overall uncertainty" measure. The consideration of uncertainty may lead to a rank reversal in comparison with that analysis neglecting uncertainty (best alternative given by the AHP). The results show that the absolute maximal impact caused by a US is approximately 0.03. With respect to a single US and the specific case characteristics, in about 50% of the simulated runs a rank reversal occurs. Similar shares of rank reversal over different USs within a single variant of the case raise the question to which uncertainty should be given prior attention in decision‐making practice. For decision analysts in EDM, this result implies that additional resources may be necessary to commonly negotiate with decision makers that uncertainties should be addressed. From a theoretical normative point of view, the effects of considering uncertainty issues in the AHP methodology cannot satisfy the ideal of a rational decision analysis. From a descriptive point of view, considering the practice of decision makers, the impacts of the considered uncertainties stay within reasonable limits, meaning that the maximal numerical impact stays on the hundredths decimal place.

Coupled human and natural systems exhibit complex interactions (e.g. feedback-loops) that are often poorly understood. Decision-makers from regional (e.g., state or provincial) scale environmental stewardship programs to international policy makers are often faced with uncertainties about future climatic and sociopolitical conditions (henceforth, system change) when supporting livelihoods and ecosystem services derived from lands and waters they oversee. Understanding how these system changes interact with adaptive decision-making processes toward stewardship of ecosystem services represents a considerable gap in knowledge. Adaptation, or iterative adjustment of management practices in response to or anticipation of system change, has been forwarded as a means of effective ecosystem stewardship. Furthermore, lack of clarity about value tradeoffs among competing program objectives (e.g., economics and aesthetics) often precludes development and implementation of adaptation. Although there have been several qualitative studies on regional to national adaptation, lacking is an empirical understanding of how the drivers and value tradeoffs associated with adaptation differ among regions and between related sectors spanning multiple countries. Diverse cultural heritages and political structures among regions of central Europe offer great opportunities for examining spatial patterns of limitations to regional-scale adaptation in forest and agricultural sectors. This project will develop a quantitative index of adaptation for examining hypotheses about patterns of rural adaptation within regions of nine countries in central Europe. Alternative hypotheses describe contrasting assumptions regarding geographic variation in the relative importance among drivers and objectives associated with adaptation. Predictions derived from these hypotheses will be examined through a survey instrument that gathers information from programs focused on rural stewardship. Survey data will be analyzed using a hierarchical Bayesian approach ...