98 research outputs found
Comparison of techniques for eliciting views and judgements in decision-making
1. Decisionâmaking is a complex process that typically includes a series of stages: identifying the issue, considering possible options, making judgements and then making a decision by combining information and values. The current status quo relies heavily on the informational aspect of decisionâmaking with little or no emphasis on the value positions that affect decisions.
2. There is increasing realization of the importance of adopting rigorous methods for each stage such that the information, views and judgements of stakeholders and experts are used in a systematic and repeatable manner. Though there are several methodological textbooks which discuss a plethora of social science techniques, it is hard to judge the suitability of any given technique for a given decision problem.
3. In decisionâmaking, the three critical aspects are âwhatâ decision is to be made, âwhoâ makes the decisions and âhowâ the decisions are made. The methods covered in this paper focus on âhowâ decisions can be made. We compare six techniques: Focus Group Discussion (FGD), Interviews, Q methodology, Multiâcriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), Nominal Group Technique and the Delphi technique specifically in the context of biodiversity conservation. All of these techniques (with the exception of MCDA) help in understanding human values and the underlying perspectives which shape decisions.
4. Based on structured reviews of 423 papers covering all six methods, we compare the conceptual and logistical characteristics of the methods, and map their suitability for the different stages of the decisionâmaking process. While interviews and FGD are wellâknown, techniques such the Nominal Group technique and Q methodology are relatively underâused. In situations where conflict is high, we recommend using the Q methodology and Delphi technique to elicit judgements. Where conflict is low, and a consensus is needed urgently, the Nominal Group technique may be more suitable.
5. We present a nuanced synthesis of methods aimed at users. The comparison of the different techniques might be useful for project managers, academics or practitioners in the planning phases of their projects and help in making better informed methodological choices.N.M. was funded by the Fondation Wiener Anspach and the Scriven post doctoral fellowship. J.H. is funded by the Belgian National Fund for Research (FRSâFNRS) and the KLIMOSâACROPOLIS project. N.T.O. was funded by Cambridge Overseas Trusts, The Wildlife Conservation Society, Wildlife Conservation Network and WildiZe Foundation. B.A.E. is funded by EU Horizon 2020 ESMERALDA Project, grant agreement no. 642007. W.J.S. is funded by Arcadia
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY POLICY INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT âSEPIAâ - Final Report
audience: researcher, professionalThe report summarizes a 3 years research program aimed at developping long term sustainable scenarios for Belgian the energy system. The research included expert participation, stakeholders assessment, quantitative modelling and fuzzy-logic analysis of the assessments. It produced three scenarios for a sustainable energy system in Belgium 2050.SEPIA Sustainable energy policy integrated assessmen
Stakeholder Consultation in the Design of a Sustainability Assessment Framework for Flanders, Belgium.
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Developing an Environmental Sustainability Toolkit to Integrate Climate Change Issues in Development Co-operation
0info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
New Perspectives for Radiation Protection Concepts in the Frame of Sustainability
0info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Introducing Sustainability Assessment in a Crowded Institutional Landscape: the case of the Flemish Region of Belgium
0info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
âGreening the Benin Poverty Reduction Strategy: a process approach to sustainability assessmentâ.
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Achieving Synergy between Better Regulation and Sustainable Development through Impact Assessment
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Developing an Environmental Sustainability Toolkit to integrate climate change issues in development co-operation.
0info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
Implementation of sustainable development in higher education: from declarations to praxis, or vice versa?
0info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe
- âŚ