Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments

I. Linkov, F. K. Satterstrom, B. Yatsalo, A. Tkachuk, G. A. Kiker, J. Kim, T. S. Bridges, Thomas Seager, K. Gardner

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Over the past several decades, environmental decision-making strategies have evolved into increasingly more sophisticated, information-intensive, and complex approaches including expert judgment, cost-benefit analysis, toxicological risk assessment, comparative risk assessment, and a number of methods for incorporating public and stakeholder values. This evolution has led to an improved array of decision-making aids, including the development of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tools that offer a scientifically sound decision analytical framework. The existence of different MCDA methods and the availability of corresponding software contribute to the possibility of practical implementation of these methods. However, even though a great deal of work has been done in justifying the theoretical foundation of these methods, real-life applications are rare. The critical attitudes of different MCDA schools toward alternative approaches may have been an obstacle in the application of MCDA. Additionally, no MCDA method is theoretically appropriate for group decision processes, and all MCDA methods and tools necessarily use significant simplifications and assumptions to rank environmental policy alternatives. Nevertheless, this paper illustrates the application of three different MCDA methods in two case studies involving management of contaminated sediments. These case studies are based on real sediment management problems experienced by the US Army Corps of Engineers and other stakeholders in the New York/New Jersey Harbor and the Cocheco Superfund Site in New Hampshire. Our analysis shows that application of three different MCDA tools points to similar management solutions, no matter which tool is applied. MCDA tools and approaches were constructively used to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each method when solving the problem.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationNATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security
Pages195-215
Number of pages21
StatePublished - 2007
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameNATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security
ISSN (Print)18714668

Fingerprint

decision analysis
sediment
stakeholder
risk assessment
decision making
tool use
Superfund
method
analytical framework
cost-benefit analysis
environmental policy
harbor
software

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F. K., Yatsalo, B., Tkachuk, A., Kiker, G. A., Kim, J., ... Gardner, K. (2007). Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments. In NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security (pp. 195-215). (NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security).

Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments. / Linkov, I.; Satterstrom, F. K.; Yatsalo, B.; Tkachuk, A.; Kiker, G. A.; Kim, J.; Bridges, T. S.; Seager, Thomas; Gardner, K.

NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security. 2007. p. 195-215 (NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Linkov, I, Satterstrom, FK, Yatsalo, B, Tkachuk, A, Kiker, GA, Kim, J, Bridges, TS, Seager, T & Gardner, K 2007, Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments. in NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security. NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security, pp. 195-215.
Linkov I, Satterstrom FK, Yatsalo B, Tkachuk A, Kiker GA, Kim J et al. Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments. In NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security. 2007. p. 195-215. (NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security).
Linkov, I. ; Satterstrom, F. K. ; Yatsalo, B. ; Tkachuk, A. ; Kiker, G. A. ; Kim, J. ; Bridges, T. S. ; Seager, Thomas ; Gardner, K. / Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments. NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security. 2007. pp. 195-215 (NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security).
@inproceedings{be5651d6b8df4cfd8e5fcf2de38ed9be,
title = "Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments",
abstract = "Over the past several decades, environmental decision-making strategies have evolved into increasingly more sophisticated, information-intensive, and complex approaches including expert judgment, cost-benefit analysis, toxicological risk assessment, comparative risk assessment, and a number of methods for incorporating public and stakeholder values. This evolution has led to an improved array of decision-making aids, including the development of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tools that offer a scientifically sound decision analytical framework. The existence of different MCDA methods and the availability of corresponding software contribute to the possibility of practical implementation of these methods. However, even though a great deal of work has been done in justifying the theoretical foundation of these methods, real-life applications are rare. The critical attitudes of different MCDA schools toward alternative approaches may have been an obstacle in the application of MCDA. Additionally, no MCDA method is theoretically appropriate for group decision processes, and all MCDA methods and tools necessarily use significant simplifications and assumptions to rank environmental policy alternatives. Nevertheless, this paper illustrates the application of three different MCDA methods in two case studies involving management of contaminated sediments. These case studies are based on real sediment management problems experienced by the US Army Corps of Engineers and other stakeholders in the New York/New Jersey Harbor and the Cocheco Superfund Site in New Hampshire. Our analysis shows that application of three different MCDA tools points to similar management solutions, no matter which tool is applied. MCDA tools and approaches were constructively used to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each method when solving the problem.",
author = "I. Linkov and Satterstrom, {F. K.} and B. Yatsalo and A. Tkachuk and Kiker, {G. A.} and J. Kim and Bridges, {T. S.} and Thomas Seager and K. Gardner",
year = "2007",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "1402058004",
series = "NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security",
pages = "195--215",
booktitle = "NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Comparative assessment of several multi-criteria decision analysis tools for management of contaminated sediments

AU - Linkov, I.

AU - Satterstrom, F. K.

AU - Yatsalo, B.

AU - Tkachuk, A.

AU - Kiker, G. A.

AU - Kim, J.

AU - Bridges, T. S.

AU - Seager, Thomas

AU - Gardner, K.

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - Over the past several decades, environmental decision-making strategies have evolved into increasingly more sophisticated, information-intensive, and complex approaches including expert judgment, cost-benefit analysis, toxicological risk assessment, comparative risk assessment, and a number of methods for incorporating public and stakeholder values. This evolution has led to an improved array of decision-making aids, including the development of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tools that offer a scientifically sound decision analytical framework. The existence of different MCDA methods and the availability of corresponding software contribute to the possibility of practical implementation of these methods. However, even though a great deal of work has been done in justifying the theoretical foundation of these methods, real-life applications are rare. The critical attitudes of different MCDA schools toward alternative approaches may have been an obstacle in the application of MCDA. Additionally, no MCDA method is theoretically appropriate for group decision processes, and all MCDA methods and tools necessarily use significant simplifications and assumptions to rank environmental policy alternatives. Nevertheless, this paper illustrates the application of three different MCDA methods in two case studies involving management of contaminated sediments. These case studies are based on real sediment management problems experienced by the US Army Corps of Engineers and other stakeholders in the New York/New Jersey Harbor and the Cocheco Superfund Site in New Hampshire. Our analysis shows that application of three different MCDA tools points to similar management solutions, no matter which tool is applied. MCDA tools and approaches were constructively used to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each method when solving the problem.

AB - Over the past several decades, environmental decision-making strategies have evolved into increasingly more sophisticated, information-intensive, and complex approaches including expert judgment, cost-benefit analysis, toxicological risk assessment, comparative risk assessment, and a number of methods for incorporating public and stakeholder values. This evolution has led to an improved array of decision-making aids, including the development of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tools that offer a scientifically sound decision analytical framework. The existence of different MCDA methods and the availability of corresponding software contribute to the possibility of practical implementation of these methods. However, even though a great deal of work has been done in justifying the theoretical foundation of these methods, real-life applications are rare. The critical attitudes of different MCDA schools toward alternative approaches may have been an obstacle in the application of MCDA. Additionally, no MCDA method is theoretically appropriate for group decision processes, and all MCDA methods and tools necessarily use significant simplifications and assumptions to rank environmental policy alternatives. Nevertheless, this paper illustrates the application of three different MCDA methods in two case studies involving management of contaminated sediments. These case studies are based on real sediment management problems experienced by the US Army Corps of Engineers and other stakeholders in the New York/New Jersey Harbor and the Cocheco Superfund Site in New Hampshire. Our analysis shows that application of three different MCDA tools points to similar management solutions, no matter which tool is applied. MCDA tools and approaches were constructively used to determine the strengths and weaknesses of each method when solving the problem.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249680681&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249680681&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:34249680681

SN - 1402058004

SN - 9781402058004

T3 - NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security

SP - 195

EP - 215

BT - NATO Security through Science Series C: Environmental Security

ER -