IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v40y2020i3d10.1007_s10669-020-09767-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying MCDA to weight indicators of seaport vulnerability to climate and extreme weather impacts for U.S. North Atlantic ports

Author

Listed:
  • R. Duncan McIntosh

    (University of Rhode Island
    Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme)

  • Austin Becker

    (University of Rhode Island)

Abstract

This paper describes a case study applying multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to weight indicators for assessing the exposure and sensitivity of seaports to climate and extreme weather impacts. Researchers employed the analytic hierarchy method (AHP) of MCDA to generate weights for a subset of expert-selected indicators of seaport exposure and sensitivity to climate and extreme weather. The indicators were selected from the results of a survey of port-experts who ranked candidate indicators by magnitude of perceived correlation with the three components of vulnerability; exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. As those port-expert respondents found significantly stronger correlation between candidate indicators and the exposure and sensitivity of a port than with a port’s adaptive capacity, this AHP exercise did not include indicators of adaptive capacity. The weighted indicators were aggregated to generate composite indices of seaport exposure and sensitivity to climate and extreme weather for 22 major ports in the North East United States. Rank order generated by AHP-weighted aggregation was compared to a subjective expert-ranking of ports by expert-perceived vulnerability to climate and extreme weather. For the sample of 22 ports, the AHP-generated ranking matched three of the top four most vulnerable ports as assessed subjectively by port-experts. These results suggest that a composite index based on open data weighted via MCDA may eventually prove useful as a data-driven tool for identifying outliers in terms of relative seaport vulnerabilities, however, improvements in the standardized reporting and sharing of port data will be required before such an indicator-based assessment method can prove decision-relevant.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Duncan McIntosh & Austin Becker, 2020. "Applying MCDA to weight indicators of seaport vulnerability to climate and extreme weather impacts for U.S. North Atlantic ports," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 356-370, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:40:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10669-020-09767-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-020-09767-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-020-09767-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-020-09767-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Government of Fiji, 2017. "Climate Vulnerability Assessment," World Bank Publications - Reports 28870, The World Bank Group.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty, 1990. "An Exposition of the AHP in Reply to the Paper "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 259-268, March.
    3. S. Eriksen & P. Kelly, 2007. "Developing Credible Vulnerability Indicators for Climate Adaptation Policy Assessment," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 495-524, May.
    4. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    5. Margaret H. Kurth & Sabrina Larkin & Jeffrey M. Keisler & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis: use in government agencies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 134-143, June.
    6. Timothy Lant & Clea Senneville, 2010. "Credibility, salience, and legitimacy of boundary objects: water managers' assessment of a simulation model in an immersive decision theater," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(3), pages 219-232, April.
    7. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    8. Stéphane Hallegatte & Nicola Ranger & Olivier Mestre & Patrice Dumas & Jan Corfee-Morlot & Celine Herweijer & Robert Wood, 2011. "Assessing climate change impacts, sea level rise and storm surge risk in port cities: a case study on Copenhagen," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(1), pages 113-137, January.
    9. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    10. Gomez-Limon, Jose Antonio & Riesgo, Laura, 2008. "Alternative Approaches On Constructing A Composite Indicator To Measure Agricultural Sustainability," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6489, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Saaty, Thomas L., 2006. "Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(2), pages 557-570, January.
    12. Austin Becker & Michele Acciaro & Regina Asariotis & Edgard Cabrera & Laurent Cretegny & Philippe Crist & Miguel Esteban & Andrew Mather & Steve Messner & Susumu Naruse & Adolf Ng & Stefan Rahmstorf &, 2013. "A note on climate change adaptation for seaports: a challenge for global ports, a challenge for global society," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 120(4), pages 683-695, October.
    13. Hovanov, Nikolai V. & Kolari, James W. & Sokolov, Mikhail V., 2008. "Deriving weights from general pairwise comparison matrices," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 205-220, March.
    14. Susan L. Cutter & Bryan J. Boruff & W. Lynn Shirley, 2003. "Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 84(2), pages 242-261, June.
    15. T Kainulainen & P Leskinen & P Korhonen & A Haara & T Hujala, 2009. "A statistical approach to assessing interval scale preferences in discrete choice problems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 252-258, February.
    16. Jeffrey C. Cegan & Ashley M. Filion & Jeffrey M. Keisler & Igor Linkov, 2017. "Trends and applications of multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: literature review," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 123-133, June.
    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. Kanwar Muhammad Javed Iqbal & Nadia Akhtar & Sarah Amir & Muhammad Irfan Khan & Ashfaq Ahmad Shah & Muhammad Atiq Ur Rehman Tariq & Wahid Ullah, 2022. "Multi-Variable Governance Index Modeling of Government’s Policies, Legal and Institutional Strategies, and Management for Climate Compatible and Sustainable Agriculture Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Ricardo Martín & Víctor Yepes, 2022. "Assessing the Relationship between Landscape and Management within Marinas: The Managers’ Perception," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-22, June.
    3. Yijie Wang & Linzao Hou & Mian Li & Ruixiang Zheng, 2021. "A Novel Fire Risk Assessment Approach for Large-Scale Commercial and High-Rise Buildings Based on Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and Coupling Revision," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-30, July.
    4. Senzheng Chen & Huichun Ye & Chaojia Nie & Hongye Wang & Jingjing Wang, 2023. "Research on the Assessment Method of Sugarcane Cultivation Suitability in Guangxi Province, China, Based on Multi-Source Data," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, April.

    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. Ardalan Bafahm & Minghe Sun, 2019. "Some Conflicting Results in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 465-486, March.
    2. Höfer, Tim & Sunak, Yasin & Siddique, Hafiz & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Wind farm siting using a spatial Analytic Hierarchy Process approach: A case study of the Städteregion Aachen," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 222-243.
    3. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. R. Cantelmi & G. Di Gravio & R. Patriarca, 2021. "Reviewing qualitative research approaches in the context of critical infrastructure resilience," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 341-376, September.
    5. Tercan, Emre & Eymen, Abdurrahman & Urfalı, Tuğrul & Saracoglu, Burak Omer, 2021. "A sustainable framework for spatial planning of photovoltaic solar farms using GIS and multi-criteria assessment approach in Central Anatolia, Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Lucille Alonso & Florent Renard, 2020. "A Comparative Study of the Physiological and Socio-Economic Vulnerabilities to Heat Waves of the Population of the Metropolis of Lyon (France) in a Climate Change Context," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-21, February.
    7. Yi Ge & Guangfei Yang & Yi Chen & Wen Dou, 2019. "Examining Social Vulnerability and Inequality: A Joint Analysis through a Connectivity Lens in the Urban Agglomerations of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Xueni Gou & Jasmine Siu Lee Lam, 2019. "Risk analysis of marine cargoes and major port disruptions," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 21(4), pages 497-523, December.
    9. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    10. Amir Noori & Hossein Bonakdari & Khosro Morovati & Bahram Gharabaghi, 2018. "The optimal dam site selection using a group decision-making method through fuzzy TOPSIS model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 471-488, December.
    11. M Tavana & M A Sodenkamp, 2010. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision analysis model for advanced technology assessment at Kennedy Space Center," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(10), pages 1459-1470, October.
    12. Souad Ahmed Benromdhane, 2021. "A multi-attribute utility model for environmental decision-making: an application to casting," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 21-32, March.
    13. Itziar González Tánago & Julia Urquijo & Veit Blauhut & Fermín Villarroya & Lucia De Stefano, 2016. "Learning from experience: a systematic review of assessments of vulnerability to drought," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 80(2), pages 951-973, January.
    14. Fabio De Felice & Laura Petrillo & Luigi Ranieri & Antonella Petrillo, 2019. "Previous Studies and Differences Between Lean Management and World Class Manufacturing," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1941-1966, November.
    15. Gerda Ana Melnik-Leroy & Gintautas Dzemyda, 2021. "How to Influence the Results of MCDM?—Evidence of the Impact of Cognitive Biases," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-25, January.
    16. Luis Diaz-Balteiro & Carlos Iglesias-Merchan & Carlos Romero & Silvestre García de Jalón, 2020. "The Sustainable Management of Land and Fisheries Resources Using Multicriteria Techniques: A Meta-Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Chia-Liang Lin & Jwu-Jenq Chen & Yu-Yu Ma, 2023. "Ranking of Service Quality Solution for Blended Design Teaching Using Fuzzy ANP and TOPSIS in the Post-COVID-19 Era," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, March.
    18. Saikia, Mrinal & Mahanta, Ratul, 2023. "Measurement of Vulnerability to Climate Change in Char Areas: A Survey," Ecology, Economy and Society - the INSEE Journal, Indian Society of Ecological Economics (INSEE), vol. 6(01), January.
    19. Chwolka, Anne & Raith, Matthias G., 2001. "Group preference aggregation with the AHP - implications for multiple-issue agendas," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 176-186, July.
    20. Zahir, Sajjad, 1999. "Geometry of decision making and the vector space formulation of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 373-396, January.

    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:spr:envsyd:v:40:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s10669-020-09767-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.