IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v2y1999i1p11-29.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prioritizing stakeholder concerns in environmental risk management

Author

Listed:
  • Roberto Accorsi
  • George Apostolakis
  • Enrico Zio

Abstract

The management of environmental programmes often involves several stakeholders with diverse, and often conflicting, concerns. This paper proposes a methodology for the assessment of stakeholder preferences regarding a number of objectives of environmental restoration activities, such as the minimization of costs and of the impact on human health and safety. This methodology is based on an analytic/deliberative process that starts with pairwise comparisons of these objectives using questionnaires that the stakeholders complete. This input is used to produce a first set of relative weights using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (the analytic part). This set, as well as possible inconsistencies of the stakeholder assessments, is discussed with the stakeholders to correct inconsistencies and revise the weights (the deliberative part). The stakeholders always have the final word regarding the relative weights. Insights gained from a case study are also presented. The feedback from the stakeholders participating in this exercise was positive.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberto Accorsi & George Apostolakis & Enrico Zio, 1999. "Prioritizing stakeholder concerns in environmental risk management," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 11-29, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:2:y:1999:i:1:p:11-29
    DOI: 10.1080/136698799376961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/136698799376961
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/136698799376961?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Hao Fanghua & Chen Guanchun, 2010. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Model Based on Weighted Borda Scoring Method for Watershed Ecological Risk Management: a Case Study of Three Gorges Reservoir Area of China," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(10), pages 2139-2165, August.
    2. 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.
    3. I. Linkov & F. K. Satterstrom & G. Kiker & T. P. Seager & T. Bridges & K. H. Gardner & S. H. Rogers & D. A. Belluck & A. Meyer, 2006. "Multicriteria Decision Analysis: A Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 61-78, February.

    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:taf:jriskr:v:2:y:1999:i:1:p:11-29. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.