IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v19y2010i3d10.1007_s10726-009-9159-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

MCDA Framework for Fishing Rights Allocation in South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Theodor J. Stewart

    (University of Cape Town)

  • Alison Joubert

    (University of Cape Town)

  • Ron Janssen

    (Vrije Universiteit)

Abstract

The work discussed in this paper relates to the allocation of fishing rights within the Western Cape province of South Africa. Many of these fisheries are under threat through over-exploitation, and yet are a traditional source of livelihood in many communities. We describe a sequence of interventions during which principles and processes of multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) formed the framework for structuring the problems, for facilitating group consensus on the decision making process, and for designing a decision support template for use in future allocations. Interactions with community representatives and with the the national Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism revealed a high degree of consistency in perceptions of the management goals that need to be taken into consideration. These goals could be structured and summarized in the form of an integrated value tree, which in turn formed the basis for a formalized decision support structure that could provide a transparent, coherent and auditable basis for the allocation of fishing rights in a fully goal-directed manner.

Suggested Citation

  • Theodor J. Stewart & Alison Joubert & Ron Janssen, 2010. "MCDA Framework for Fishing Rights Allocation in South Africa," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 247-265, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:19:y:2010:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-009-9159-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-009-9159-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-009-9159-9
    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/s10726-009-9159-9?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. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Ensslin, Leonardo & Correa, Emerson C. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1999. "Decision Support Systems in action: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 315-335, March.
    2. Ann Davey & David Olson, 1998. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making Models in Group Decision Support," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 55-75, January.
    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. Kiryluk-Dryjska, Ewa & Beba, Patrycja, 2018. "Region-specific budgeting of rural development funds—An application study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 126-134.
    2. Joseph R. Kakeneno & Cathal MacSwiney Brugha, 2017. "Usability of Nomology-based methodologies in supporting problem structuring across cultures: the case of participatory decision-making in Tanzania rural communities," 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. 25(2), pages 393-415, June.
    3. Simon French, 2024. "Whose Judgement? Reflections on Elicitation in Bayesian Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 143-159, September.
    4. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Rocco Curto, 2023. "DIKEDOC: a multicriteria methodology to organise and communicate knowledge," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1049-1082, June.
    5. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.
    6. Karsu, Özlem & Morton, Alec, 2014. "Incorporating balance concerns in resource allocation decisions: A bi-criteria modelling approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 70-82.
    7. Estévez, Rodrigo A. & Gelcich, Stefan, 2015. "Participative multi-criteria decision analysis in marine management and conservation: Research progress and the challenge of integrating value judgments and uncertainty," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-7.
    8. Boukherroub, Tasseda & LeBel, Luc & Ruiz, Angel, 2017. "A framework for sustainable forest resource allocation: A Canadian case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 66(PB), pages 224-235.

    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. Dias, Luis C. & Climaco, Joao N., 2005. "Dealing with imprecise information in group multicriteria decisions: a methodology and a GDSS architecture," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(2), pages 291-307, January.
    2. Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert & Andrew B. Whinston, 2001. "Research Commentary: Introducing a Third Dimension in Information Systems Design—The Case for Incentive Alignment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 225-239, September.
    3. Dimitrios Gouglas & Kendall Hoyt & Elizabeth Peacocke & Aristidis Kaloudis & Trygve Ottersen & John-Arne Røttingen, 2019. "Setting Strategic Objectives for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations: An Exploratory Decision Analysis Process," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 430-446, November.
    4. Grabisch, Michel & Labreuche, Christophe & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2003. "On the extension of pseudo-Boolean functions for the aggregation of interacting criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 28-47, July.
    5. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    6. Meinard, Y. & Tsoukiàs, A., 2019. "On the rationality of decision aiding processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1074-1084.
    7. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    8. María Carmen Carnero, 2020. "Fuzzy Multicriteria Models for Decision Making in Gamification," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-23, May.
    9. Ozum Egilmez & Gozde Koca, 2021. "Drivers, Challenges, and Integration of Health 4.0 Societal Engagement: Evidence from Turkey," Istanbul Business Research, Istanbul University Business School, vol. 50(1), pages 127-148, May.
    10. Wagner Silva Costa & Plácido R. Pinheiro & Nádia M. dos Santos & Lucídio dos A. F. Cabral, 2023. "Aligning the Goals Hybrid Model for the Diagnosis of Mental Health Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-31, March.
    11. L M P Neves & A G Martins & C H Antunes & L C Dias, 2004. "Using SSM to rethink the analysis of energy efficiency initiatives," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(9), pages 968-975, September.
    12. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Oliveira, Mónica D., 2012. "A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 424-436.
    13. F A F Ferreira & S P Santos & P M M Rodrigues, 2011. "Adding value to bank branch performance evaluation using cognitive maps and MCDA: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(7), pages 1320-1333, July.
    14. Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Sérgio P. Santos, 2021. "Two decades on the MACBETH approach: a bibliometric analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 901-925, January.
    15. G Montibeller & V Belton & F Ackermann & L Ensslin, 2008. "Reasoning maps for decision aid: an integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(5), pages 575-589, May.
    16. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    17. Lucas Miguel Alencar Correia & Jonhatan Magno Norte Silva & Wilza Karla Leite & Ruan Eduardo Carneiro Lucas & Geraldo Alves Colaço, 2022. "A multicriteria decision model to rank workstations in a footwear industry based on a FITradeoff-ranking method for ergonomics interventions," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 3335-3371, September.
    18. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    19. Joseph R. Kakeneno & Cathal MacSwiney Brugha, 2017. "Usability of Nomology-based methodologies in supporting problem structuring across cultures: the case of participatory decision-making in Tanzania rural communities," 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. 25(2), pages 393-415, June.
    20. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 237-263, July.

    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:grdene:v:19:y:2010:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-009-9159-9. 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.