Download all Technical Policy Briefing Notes in a single ... - Mediation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Key Messages• There is increasing interest in the appraisal ofoptions, as adaptation moves from theory topractice. In response, a number of existingand new decision support tools are beingconsidered, including methods that addressuncertainty.• The FP7 MEDIATION project has undertaken adetailed review of these tools, and has testedthem in a series of case studies. It hasassessed their applicability for adaptation andanalysed how they consider uncertainty. Thefindings have been used to provideinformation and guidance for the MEDIATIONAdaptation Platform and are summarised in aset of policy briefing notes.• One of the tools widely recommended foradaptation is Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA).MCA is an approach that allows considerationof both quantitative and qualitative data in theranking of alternative options.• The approach provides a systematic methodfor assessing and scoring options against arange of decision criteria, some of which areexpressed in physical or monetary units, andsome which are qualitative. The variouscriteria can then be weighted to provide anoverall ranking of options. These steps areundertaken using stakeholder consultationand/or expert input.• MCA has been widely applied in theenvironmental domain. It is also used as acomplementary tool to support cost-benefitanalysis, to consider the performance ofoptions against criteria that may be difficult tovalue or involve qualitative aspects.• The approach has high relevance foradaptation. Criteria can be included toconsider uncertainty or various elements ofgood adaptation, and the approach brings theflexibility to work with qualitative information,which is particularly useful given there areoften data gaps.• The review has considered the strengths andweakness of the approach for adaptation. Themain strength is that it allows consideration ofboth quantitative and qualitative datatogether, and can compare monetary andnon-monetary criteria directly. This allows theconsideration of a much broader set of criteriathan other approaches.• The potential weaknesses involve the fact thatthe scoring and weighting can be quitesubjective, influenced by the stakeholdersinvolved in the process. The consideration ofuncertainty is also usually more qualitative.• Previous applications of MCA for adaptationhave been reviewed, and adaptation casestudies are summarised. MCA has been usedas the main decision support tool in earlynational adaptation policy analysis, but hasalso been used alongside CBA in adaptationproject appraisal to consider broader criteriaand aspects.• The review and case studies provide usefulinformation on the types of adaptationproblem types where MCA might beappropriate, as well as data needs, resourcerequirements and good practice lessons.MCA is particularly applicable in areas wherequantification is difficult, or for sectors wherebroader objectives are important. Theapproach is considered particularly useful toidentify promising options, which can then besubject to more detailed appraisal.
Multi-Criteria AnalysisIntroductionThere is increasing policy interest in the appraisalof options, as adaptation moves from theory topractice. At the same time, it is recognised thatthe appraisal of climate change adaptationinvolves a number of major challenges,particularly the consideration of uncertainty. Inresponse, a number of existing and new decisionsupport tools are being considered foradaptation.The European Commission FP7 fundedMEDIATION project (Methodology for EffectiveDecision-making on Impacts and AdaptaTION) islooking at adaptation decision support tools, inline with its objectives to advance the analysis ofimpacts, vulnerability and adaptation, and topromote knowledge sharing through theMediation Adaptation Platform(http://www.mediation-project.eu/platform/). Tocomplement the information on the Platform, aseries of Policy Briefing Notes have beenproduced on Decision Support Methods forClimate Change Adaptation.An overview of all the decision support toolsreviewed is provided in Policy Briefing Note 1:Method Overview, which summarises eachmethod, discusses the potential relevance foradaptation and provides guidance on theirpotential applicability. The methods consideredinclude existing appraisal tools (cost-benefitanalysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and multicriteriaanalysis), as well as techniques that morefully address uncertainty (real options analysis,robust decision making, portfolio analysis anditerative risk (adaptive) management). It alsoincludes complementary tools that can assist inadaptation assessment, including analytichierarchy process, social network analysis andadaptation turning points. Additional informationon each method is presented in a separatePolicy Briefing Notes (2 – 10).This Policy Brief (Note 6) provides a summary ofmulti-criteria analysis. It provides a briefsynthesis of the approach, its strengths andweaknesses, the relevance for adaptation, how itconsiders uncertainty, and presents case studyexamples. It is stressed that this note onlyprovides an overview: more detailed informationis available in MEDIATION deliverables, andsources and links on the Mediation AdaptationPlatform.Description of the MethodMCA is an approach that allows consideration ofboth quantitative and qualitative data in theranking of alternative options.The approach provides a systematic method forassessing and scoring options against a range ofdecision criteria, some of which are expressed inphysical or monetary units, and some which arequalitative. The various criteria can then beweighted to provide an overall ranking ofoptions. These steps are undertaken usingstakeholder consultation and/or expert input.The approach identifies alternative options,selects criteria and scores options against these,then assigns weights to each criterion to providea weighted sum that is used to rank options(Janssen and Van Herwijnen, 2006). The processallows the weights (for each criterion) to reflectthe preferences of the decision-makers and theweighted sum of the different criteria is used torank the options.MCA has been widely applied for ranking variousalternatives, especially in the environmentaldomain. It is often included in guidance as one ofa number of potential tools for option appraisal(e.g. as for [regulatory] impact assessment, EC,2005). It can be used for strategy level analysisor for individual projects or investment decisions.It is also sometimes used as a complementarytool to support cost-benefit analysis, to considerthe performance of options against criteria thatmay be difficult to value or involve qualitativeaspects. Such applications include supportingdecision analysis for transport appraisal(Dodgson et al, 2000).A simplified example is included in the boxbelow.• The approach involves a number of commonsteps.• To identify the objectives and importantdecision criteria.• To identify potential options. Note thatstakeholder consultation is often used toidentify the most important options.• Identify relevant criteria to assess the optionsagainst. The number of criteria can range froma few key criteria to twenty or more criteria,though a higher the number of criteria1
Page 2 and 3:
Key Messages• There is increasing
Page 4:
DecisionSupport 1Stage three relate
Page 7 and 8:
Method OverviewAs a result there is
Page 9 and 10:
Method OverviewThe advantage of the
Page 11 and 12:
Method OverviewTable 1. Strengths a
Page 13 and 14:
Iterative Risk AssessmentMethod Ove
Page 15 and 16:
Method OverviewTable 3. Inputs, Ben
Page 17 and 18:
Method OverviewThird, there some di
Page 19 and 20:
Method Overviewhttp://reports.eea.e
Page 22 and 23: Further informationThe research lea
Page 24 and 25: Key Messages• There is increasing
Page 26 and 27: DecisionSupport 2Box 2. Comparing M
Page 28 and 29: DecisionSupport 2Table 1. Possible
Page 30 and 31: DecisionSupport 2location and techn
Page 32 and 33: DecisionSupport 2Discussion and App
Page 34: DecisionSupport 2ReferencesBoyd, R
Page 37 and 38: Decision SupportMethods for Climate
Page 39 and 40: Robust Decision MakingIntroductionT
Page 41 and 42: Robust Decision Makingit more close
Page 43 and 44: Robust Decision MakingCase Study 2:
Page 45 and 46: Robust Decision MakingReferencesDes
Page 49 and 50: Real Options AnalysisIntroductionTh
Page 51 and 52: Real Options AnalysisBox 1: The Con
Page 53 and 54: Real Options AnalysisStrengths and
Page 55 and 56: Real Options AnalysisCase Study 2:
Page 57 and 58: Real Options AnalysisDiscussion and
Page 60 and 61: Further informationThe research lea
Page 62 and 63: Key Messages• There is increasing
Page 64 and 65: DecisionSupport 5portfolios of two
Page 66 and 67: DecisionSupport 5Case Study 1: Fore
Page 68: DecisionSupport 5Discussion and App
Page 71: Decision SupportMethods for Climate
Page 75 and 76: Multi-Criteria AnalysisIn the imple
Page 77 and 78: Multi-Criteria AnalysisBox 1. MCA f
Page 79 and 80: Multi-Criteria AnalysisIn assessing
Page 81 and 82: Multi-Criteria Analysis3, 4 en 5),
Page 85 and 86: Analytic Hierarchy ProcessIntroduct
Page 87 and 88: Analytic Hierarchy ProcessThe AHP m
Page 89 and 90: Analytic Hierarchy ProcessThe resul
Page 91 and 92: Analytic Hierarchy Processwith an a
Page 93 and 94: Analytic Hierarchy ProcessRamanatha
Page 97 and 98: Social Network AnalysisIntroduction
Page 99 and 100: Social Network Analysistransfer, th
Page 101 and 102: Social Network Analysisadvantage of
Page 103 and 104: Social Network AnalysisBox 3. Netwo
Page 105 and 106: Social Network AnalysisThe overall
Page 107 and 108: Social Network AnalysisComparing th
Page 109 and 110: Social Network AnalysisCash, D., Cl
Page 113 and 114: Adaptation Turning PointsIntroducti
Page 115 and 116: Adaptation Turning Pointsalso be ro
Page 117 and 118: Adaptation Turning PointsCase Studi
Page 119 and 120: Adaptation Turning PointsCase Study
Page 121 and 122: Adaptation Turning PointsDiscussion
Page 123 and 124:
Adaptation Turning PointsLeary, D.
show all

Download all Technical Policy Briefing Notes in a single ... - Mediation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?