The Application of a Simple Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis Shell to Natural Resource Management Decision Making
- 1.7k Downloads
Natural resource management decision making generally requires the analysis of a variety of environmental, social and economic information, incorporating value judgement and policy and management goals. Justifiable decisions depend on the logical and transparent combination and analysis of information. This chapter describes the application of spatial multi-criteria analysis to natural resource assessment and priority setting at regional and national scales using a newly developed spatial multi-criteria analysis tool — the Multi-Criteria Analysis Shell for Spatial Decision Support (MCAS-S). MCAS-S is designed for use in participatory processes and workshop situations where a clear understanding of different approaches to spatial data management and information arrangement is necessary. The MCAS-S work environment provides for multiple map display, combination and manipulation, live update of changes, and development of spider/radar plots important in ecosystem service assessments. These and other capabilities promote clear visualisation of the relationships among the decision, the science, other constraints and the spatial data. The regional scale example illustrates the analysis of biodiversity and salinity mitigation trade-offs in revegetation in a participatory process. The national scale application illustrates reporting to policy clients on the tensions between resources use and conservation in Australian rangelands — essentially an expert analysis.
KeywordsGlobal Sensitivity Analysis Multicriteria Analysis Multicriteria Decision Analysis Ecosystem Service Assessment Spatial Data Management
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Brans JP, Mareschal B, Vincke PH (1984) PROMETHEE: A family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. Operational Research 22:477–490Google Scholar
- Bui E (ed) (1999) A soil information strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin (MDBSIS). Report to Murray Darling Basin Commission, Project D5038, available at http://www.brs.gov.au/mdbsis/publications.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Hill MJ, Lesslie R, Barry A, Barry S (2005b) A simple, portable, spatial multicriteria analysis shell – MCAS-S. In: Zerger A, Argent RM (eds) MODSIM 2005 International Congress on Modelling and Simulation. Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand, 12–15 December 2005, pp 1532–1538, available at http://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim05/papers/hill.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Hill P, Cresswell H, Hubbard L (2006a) Spatial prioritisation of NRM investment in the West Hume area (Murray CMA region). Technical Report, CSIRO, Water for a Healthy Country National Research Flagship: Canberra, pp 1–28Google Scholar
- Lesslie R, Hill MJ, Woldendorp G, Dawson S, Smith J (2006b) Towards Sustainability for Australia’s Rangelands: Analysing the Options. Australian Government Bureau of Rural Sciences: Canberra, pp 1–12Google Scholar
- Murray Catchment Management Board (2001) Murray catchment management plan; a blueprint for action. Dated 17 October 2001 (draft)Google Scholar
- Saaty TL (2000) Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with AHP Analytic Heirarchy Process. RWS Publications, PittsburgGoogle Scholar
- Stafford-Smith DM, Morton SR, Ash JA (2000) Towards sustainable pastoralism in Australia’s Rangelands. Australian Journal of Environmental Management 7:190–203Google Scholar
- Veitch SM, Bowyer JK (1996) ASSESS: A System for Selecting Suitable Sites. In: Morain S, Lopez Baros S (eds) Raster Imagery in Geographic Information Systems. OnWord Press, Santa Fe, p 495Google Scholar
- Walker J, Veitch S, Dowling T, Braaten R, Guppy L, Herron N (2002) Assessment of catchment condition. CSIRO Land and Water, CanberraGoogle Scholar