IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csi/report/00_003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Supporting Decisions: Understanding natural resource management assessment techniques

Author

Abstract

Report to the Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation. This document presents a review of NRM decision support techniques. It draws upon previous studies in the fields of management science, operations research, environmental economics and natural resource management. The objectives of the document are to: Explain the workings of the more significant (representative) methods of NRM decision support (including the latest developments); Discuss how these decision support methods may influence the outcome of NRM decisions; and Provide practicing NRM decision makers with guidance for choosing which methods to apply.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Hajkowicz & Mike Young & Darla Hatton MacDonald, 2000. "Supporting Decisions: Understanding natural resource management assessment techniques," Natural Resource Management Economics 00_003, Policy and Economic Research Unit, CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia.
    • Handle: RePEc:csi:report:00_003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/consultancy/2000/support_decisions.pdf
    Download Restriction: none
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whittington, Dale & Smith, V. Kerry & Okorafor, Apia & Okore, Augustine & Liu, Jin Long & McPhail, Alexander, 1992. "Giving respondents time to think in contingent valuation studies: A developing country application," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 205-225, May.
    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. Dyack, Brenda & Connor, Jeffery D. & Hatton MacDonald, Darla, 2005. "Screening options and setting priorities for River Murray floodplains," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137858, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Mirabi, Mehrdad & Mianabadi, Hojjat & Zarghami, Mahdi & Sharifi, Mohammad Bagher & Mostert, Erik, 2014. "Risk-based evaluation of wastewater treatment projects: A case study in Niasar city, Iran," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 168-177.
    3. Linda Holz & George Kuczera & Jetse Kalma, 2006. "Multiple criteria decision making: Facilitating a learning environment," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(3), pages 455-470.
    4. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2009. "A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2535-2548, August.
    5. Mike Young, 1999. "Costing Dust: How much does wind erosion cost the people of South Australia?," Natural Resource Management Economics 99_001, Policy and Economic Research Unit, CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia.
    6. Razieh Mosadeghi & Jan Warnken & Rodger Tomlinson & Hamid Mirfenderesk, 2013. "Uncertainty analysis in the application of multi-criteria decision-making methods in Australian strategic environmental decisions," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 1097-1124, October.
    7. Aleta Lederwasch & Pierre Mukheibir, 2013. "The Triple Bottom Line and Progress toward Ecological Sustainable Development: Australia’s Coal Mining Industry as a Case Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-13, March.
    8. Stelios Grafakos & Alexandros Flamos & Elena Marie Enseñado, 2015. "Preferences Matter: A Constructive Approach to Incorporating Local Stakeholders’ Preferences in the Sustainability Evaluation of Energy Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-39, August.

    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. Tuan, Tran Huu & Navrud, Stale, 2009. "Applying the dissonance-minimising format to value cultural heritage in developing countries," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-17.
    2. Kamuanga, Mulumba & Swallow, Brent M. & Sigue, Hamade & Bauer, Burkhard, 2001. "Evaluating contingent and actual contributions to a local public good: Tsetse control in the Yale agro-pastoral zone, Burkina Faso," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 115-130, October.
    3. McDaniels, Timothy L. & Gregory, Robin & Arvai, Joseph & Chuenpagdee, Ratana, 2003. "Decision structuring to alleviate embedding in environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 33-46, August.
    4. John P. Hoehn & Douglas J. Krieger, 2000. "An Economic Analysis of Water and Wastewater Investments in Cairo, Egypt," Evaluation Review, , vol. 24(6), pages 579-608, December.
    5. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    6. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh, 2016. "How are you? How's it going? What's up? What's happening? Nudging people to tell us how they really are," Working Papers in Economics 649, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Tobias Börger, 2016. "Are Fast Responses More Random? Testing the Effect of Response Time on Scale in an Online Choice Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(2), pages 389-413, October.
    8. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    9. Miguel Ángel Tobarra-González, 2015. "A new recoding method for treating protest responses in contingent valuation studies using travel cost data," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(8), pages 1479-1489, August.
    10. P. Calia & E. Strazzera, 1998. "Bias and efficiency of single vs. double bound models for contingent valuation studies: a Monte Carlo Analysis," Working Paper CRENoS 199801, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    11. Obinna Onwujekwe & Julia Fox‐Rushby & Kara Hanson, 2005. "Inter‐rater and test–retest reliability of three contingent valuation question formats in south‐east Nigeria," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(5), pages 529-536, May.
    12. Álvarez-Farizo, Begoña & Gil, José M. & Howard, B.J., 2009. "Impacts from restoration strategies: Assessment through valuation workshops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 787-797, January.
    13. Ahlheim, Michael & Schneider, Friedrich, 2013. "Considering Household Size in Contingent Valuation Studies," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79974, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. José Grisolía & Kenneth Willis, 2012. "A latent class model of theatre demand," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 36(2), pages 113-139, May.
    15. Joseph Cook & Dale Whittington & Do Gia Canh & F. Reed Johnson & Andrew Nyamete, 2007. "Reliability Of Stated Preferences For Cholera And Typhoid Vaccines With Time To Think In Hue, Vietnam," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(1), pages 100-114, January.
    16. Jung-Eun Kim & Jungsung Yeo, 2010. "Valuation of Consumers’ Personal Information: A South Korean Example," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 297-306, September.
    17. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Anna Bartczak & Wiktor Budziński & Marek Giergiczny, 2014. "Within- and between- sample tests of preference stability and willingness to pay for forest management," Working Papers 2014-24, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    18. Ukwueze Ezebuilo & Ogujiuba Kanayo & Adenuga Adeniyi, 2005. "How Useful Is Contingent Valuation Of The Environment To Water Services? Evidence From South East, Nigeria," Econometrics 0512012, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Donfouet, Hermann Pythagore Pierre & Mohamed, Shukri F. & Otieno, Peter & Wambiya, Elvis & Mutua, Martin Kavao & Danaei, Goodarz, 2020. "Economic valuation of setting up a social health enterprise in urban poor-resource setting in Kenya," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Australia; natural resource management; assessment; decision support;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation

    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:csi:report:00_003. 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: Marcia Sanderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pecsiau.html .

    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.