Use of participatory stakeholder engagement processes could be important to reduce the risk of potential conflicts in managing contaminated sites. Most stakeholder engagement techniques are qualitative in nature and require experienced facilitators. This study proposes a multicriteria involvement process to enhance transparency and stakeholder participation and applies it to a contaminated sediment management case study for Bergen Harbor, Norway. The suggested multicriteria involvement process builds on the quantitative principles of multicriteria decision analysis and also incorporates group interaction and learning through qualitative participatory methods. Three different advisory groups consisting of local residents, local stakeholders, and nonresident sediment experts were invited to participate in a stakeholder engagement process to provide consensual comparative advice on sediment remediation alternatives. In order for stakeholders or residents to be able to embrace a complex decision such as selection of remediation alternatives, the involvement process with lateral learning, combined with multicriteria decision analysis providing structure, robustness and transparent documentation was preferable. In addition, a multicriteria involvement process resulted in consistent ranking of remediation alternatives across residents, stakeholder, and experts, relative to individual intuitive ranking without the multicriteria involvement process.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ieam.182DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

multicriteria involvement
20
involvement process
20
stakeholder engagement
12
remediation alternatives
12
enhance transparency
8
transparency stakeholder
8
stakeholder participation
8
bergen harbor
8
harbor norway
8
multicriteria decision
8

Similar Publications

The research relevance is determined by the need for rational use of limited resources in the healthcare sector and the importance of implementing the results of scientific research into medical practice to improve the quality of medical care. The study aims to identify key criteria and develop a system for evaluating clinical trials to prioritise the most promising areas based on their practical applicability in healthcare. The expert evaluation method of 17 research projects in the field of clinical medicine funded by government grants, involving 37 experts, was used to achieve the objective.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Comparative assessment of Watershed Hydrological Health (WHH) using multi-criteria decision-making approach based on PSR framework.

J Environ Manage

December 2024

Department of Watershed Management Engineering, Faculty of Natural Resources and Marine Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Noor, 46414-356, Iran. Electronic address:

The health of a watershed is a crucial aspect that involves evaluating ecological, hydrological, and human factors to determine its overall well-being and functionality. Hydrological components are key parts of a watershed. Therefore, the present study aims to assess Watershed Hydrological Health (WHH) using the Pressure-State-Response (PSR) framework and to compare WHH priorities derived from Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approaches in the Gorganroud Watershed, Iran.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

A decision-making model for blasting risk assessment in mines using FBWM and GRA methods.

Sci Rep

December 2024

Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Due to the extensive use of explosives, the failure to identify hazards and assess risks in blasting may lead to catastrophic consequences. However, classical risk assessment approaches are limited in their ability to address ambiguity and uncertainty, as well as in assigning weights to the criteria involved in the risk assessment process. This study employs a multi-criteria decision-making system to address these limitations and assess the risks associated with blasting.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

A Standardized Measurement and Valuation Scale of Genomic Utility for Policy Decisions: The GUV Scale.

Value Health

December 2024

Australian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Objectives: The multifaceted ways in which genomics can be valuable to clinicians, patients, families, and society are important for informing prioritization decisions by policy makers. This study aims to develop a standardized, cumulative, and preference-weighted genomic utility valuation (GUV) on a scale of 0% to 100%.

Methods: A multicriteria decision analysis was conducted with experts involved in policy, clinical, research, and consumer advocacy leadership in Australia for the valuation of policy priority indicators of genomic utility.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

This study provides a systematic review of existing evidence concerning the efficacy of Jiangzhi Tongluo Soft Capsules(JTSC) in treating hyperlipidemia(syndrome of blood stasis and Qi stagnation), following the Guidelines for clinical evidence and value assessment of drugs. The qualitative and quantitative methods were integrated, including questionnaire surveys, evidence-based medicine, and pharmacoeconomic evaluation. Multi-criteria decision analysis(MCDA) model was used for comprehensive assessment of the clinical evidence and value of JTSC for hyperlipidemia in "6+1" dimensions: safety, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, innovation, suitability, accessibility, and traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) characteristics.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!