IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0065056.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Portfolio Decision Analysis Framework for Value-Focused Ecosystem Management

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo Convertino
  • L James Valverde Jr

Abstract

Management of natural resources in coastal ecosystems is a complex process that is made more challenging by the need for stakeholders to confront the prospect of sea level rise and a host of other environmental stressors. This situation is especially true for coastal military installations, where resource managers need to balance conflicting objectives of environmental conservation against military mission. The development of restoration plans will necessitate incorporating stakeholder preferences, and will, moreover, require compliance with applicable federal/state laws and regulations. To promote the efficient allocation of scarce resources in space and time, we develop a portfolio decision analytic (PDA) framework that integrates models yielding policy-dependent predictions for changes in land cover and species metapopulations in response to restoration plans, under different climate change scenarios. In a manner that is somewhat analogous to financial portfolios, infrastructure and natural resources are classified as human and natural assets requiring management. The predictions serve as inputs to a Multi Criteria Decision Analysis model (MCDA) that is used to measure the benefits of restoration plans, as well as to construct Pareto frontiers that represent optimal portfolio allocations of restoration actions and resources. Optimal plans allow managers to maintain or increase asset values by contrasting the overall degradation of the habitat and possible increased risk of species decline against the benefits of mission success. The optimal combination of restoration actions that emerge from the PDA framework allows decision-makers to achieve higher environmental benefits, with equal or lower costs, than those achievable by adopting the myopic prescriptions of the MCDA model. The analytic framework presented here is generalizable for the selection of optimal management plans in any ecosystem where human use of the environment conflicts with the needs of threatened and endangered species. The PDA approach demonstrates the advantages of integrated, top-down management, versus bottom-up management approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Convertino & L James Valverde Jr, 2013. "Portfolio Decision Analysis Framework for Value-Focused Ecosystem Management," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0065056
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065056
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065056&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0065056?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chu-Agor, M.L. & Muñoz-Carpena, R. & Kiker, G.A. & Aiello-Lammens, M.E. & Akçakaya, H.R. & Convertino, M. & Linkov, I., 2012. "Simulating the fate of Florida Snowy Plovers with sea-level rise: Exploring research and management priorities with a global uncertainty and sensitivity analysis perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 33-47.
    2. Igor Linkov & Susan Cormier & Joshua Gold & F. Kyle Satterstrom & Todd Bridges, 2012. "Using Our Brains to Develop Better Policy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 374-380, March.
    3. Mark C. Andersen & Bruce Thompson & Kenneth Boykin, 2004. "Spatial Risk Assessment Across Large Landscapes with Varied Land Use: Lessons from a Conservation Assessment of Military Lands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1231-1242, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kleczkowski, Adam & Ellis, Ciaran & Hanley, Nick & Goulson, David, 2017. "Pesticides and bees: Ecological-economic modelling of bee populations on farmland," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 53-62.
    2. Chunshan Zhou & Shijie Li & Shaojian Wang, 2018. "Examining the Impacts of Urban Form on Air Pollution in Developing Countries: A Case Study of China’s Megacities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, July.
    3. Contreras-Reyes, Javier E. & López Quintero, Freddy O. & Wiff, Rodrigo, 2018. "Bayesian modeling of individual growth variability using back-calculation: Application to pink cusk-eel (Genypterus blacodes) off Chile," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 385(C), pages 145-153.
    4. Marek Vach & Pavla Vachová, 2016. "Stochastic Identification of Stability of Competitive Interactions in Ecosystems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-12, May.
    5. Tobias Fasth & Samuel Bohman & Aron Larsson & Love Ekenberg & Mats Danielson, 2020. "Portfolio Decision Analysis for Evaluating Stakeholder Conflicts in Land Use Planning," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 321-343, April.
    6. Jorge Salas & Víctor Yepes, 2020. "Enhancing Sustainability and Resilience through Multi-Level Infrastructure Planning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-22, February.
    7. Jun Zhao & Bo Shen, 2019. "The Strategies for Improving Energy Efficiency of Power System with Increasing Share of Wind Power in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, June.
    8. Valentina Ferretti & Gilberto Montibeller, 2019. "An Integrated Framework for Environmental Multi‐Impact Spatial Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(1), pages 257-273, January.
    9. Wang, Q. & Poh, K.L., 2014. "A survey of integrated decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 691-702.
    10. Convertino, Matteo & Annis, Antonio & Nardi, Fernando, 2019. "Information-theoretic Portfolio Decision Model for Optimal Flood Management," Earth Arxiv k5aut, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adiel Teixeira Almeida & Eduarda Asfora Frej & Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli, 2021. "Combining holistic and decomposition paradigms in preference modeling with the flexibility of FITradeoff," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 29(1), pages 7-47, March.
    2. Igor Linkov & Matthew D. Wood & Renae Ditmer & Anthony Cox & Robert Ross, 2013. "Collective risk management: insights and opportunities for DoD decision-makers," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 335-340, September.
    3. Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli & Adiel Teixeira Almeida, 2022. "Use of the Alpha-Theta Diagram as a decision neuroscience tool for analyzing holistic evaluation in decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(2), pages 1197-1219, May.
    4. Yan Tong & Haipeng Niu & Liangxin Fan, 2016. "Willingness of Farmers to Transform Vacant Rural Residential Land into Cultivated Land in a Major Grain-Producing Area of Central China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.
    5. Perz, Stephen G. & Muñoz-Carpena, Rafael & Kiker, Gregory & Holt, Robert D., 2013. "Evaluating ecological resilience with global sensitivity and uncertainty analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 263(C), pages 174-186.
    6. Linhoss, Anna C. & Kiker, Gregory A. & Aiello-Lammens, Matthew E. & Chu-Agor, Ma. Librada & Convertino, Matteo & Muñoz-Carpena, Rafael & Fischer, Richard & Linkov, Igor, 2013. "Decision analysis for species preservation under sea-level rise," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 263(C), pages 264-272.
    7. Gieder, Katherina D. & Karpanty, Sarah M. & Fraser, James D. & Catlin, Daniel H. & Gutierrez, Benjamin T. & Plant, Nathaniel G. & Turecek, Aaron M. & Robert Thieler, E., 2014. "A Bayesian network approach to predicting nest presence of the federally-threatened piping plover (Charadrius melodus) using barrier island features," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 276(C), pages 38-50.
    8. Convertino, Matteo & Welle, Paul & Muñoz-Carpena, Rafael & Kiker, Gregory A. & Chu-Agor, Ma.L. & Fischer, Richard A. & Linkov, Igor, 2012. "Epistemic uncertainty in predicting shorebird biogeography affected by sea-level rise," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 1-15.
    9. Mark Burgman & James Franklin & Keith R. Hayes & Geoffrey R. Hosack & Gareth W. Peters & Scott A. Sisson, 2012. "Modeling Extreme Risks in Ecology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(11), pages 1956-1966, November.
    10. Roland W. Scholz, 2017. "Managing complexity: from visual perception to sustainable transitions—contributions of Brunswik’s Theory of Probabilistic Functionalism," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 381-409, December.
    11. Valentina Ferretti & Gilberto Montibeller, 2019. "An Integrated Framework for Environmental Multi‐Impact Spatial Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(1), pages 257-273, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0065056. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.