Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T02:37:22.468Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Research Article: Multiattribute Choice Analysis in Ecosystem Restoration Planning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2009

J. Walter Milon ,
Alan W. Hodges  and
Arbindra Rimal
J. Walter Milon*
Affiliation:
Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville
Alan W. Hodges
Affiliation:
Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville
Arbindra Rimal
Affiliation:
Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville
*
Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, PO Box 110240, Gainesville, FL 32611-0240; (fax) 352-392-9898; (e-mail) milon@fred.ifas.ufl.edu.
Get access

Abstract

Ecosystem restoration planning poses many challenges in deciding what the objectives of restoration will be and how to achieve them. Multiattribute utility choice analysis was used in this study to identify public preferences in Florida for restoration of the Everglades/South Florida ecosystem. The analysis utilized both structural (species populations) and functional (water levels and timing) attributes to represent states of the ecosystem in conjunction with other attributes to represent social tradeoffs in restoration planning. Statistical results on the relative weighting of different attributes indicated strong preferences for Everglades restoration were tempered by concern for the consequences of restoration decisions on municipal water users and agricultural landowners. Multiattribute choice approaches provide a framework to integrate the work of natural and social scientists in adaptive management of ecosystem restoration planning and to provide better information for resource managers about public preferences for different types and levels of restoration.

Information

Type
Features & Reviews
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 176 - 187
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adamowicz, V., Louviere, J., and Williams, M.. 1994. “Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26:271–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S.. 1985. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Applications to Travel Demand. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 390 pp.Google Scholar
Boardman, A., Greenberg, D., Vining, A., and Weimer, D.. 1996. Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
Bratton, S. P. 1992. “Alternative Models of Ecosystem Restoration.” In Ecosystem Health: New Goals for Environmental Management, Costanza, R., Norton, B.G., and Haskell, B.D., eds. Island Press, Washington, DC, 170–189.Google Scholar
Brunswik, E. 1955. “Representative Design and Probabilistic Theory in a Functional Psychology.” Psychological Review 62 (3):193–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cairns, J. 1988. “Restoration Ecology: The New Frontier.” In Rehabilitating Damaged Ecosystem, Cairns, J., ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Cairns, J. 1991. “The Status of Theoretical and Applied Restoration Ecology.” The Environmental Professional 13 (3):186–194.Google Scholar
Carroll, J., and Green, P.. 1995. “Psychometric Methods in Marketing Research: Part I, Conjoint Analysis.” Journal of Marketing Research 32:385–391.Google Scholar
Carson, R., Louviere, J., Anderson, D., Arabie, P., Bunch, D., Hensher, D., Johnson, R., Kuhfeld, W., Steinberg, D., Swait, J., Timmermans, H., and Wiley, J.. 1994. “Experimental Analysis of Choice.” Marketing Letters 5:351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, S., and Ogden, J., eds. 1994. Everglades—The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.Google Scholar
De Palma, A., Myers, G., and Papageorgiou, Y.. 1994. “Rational Choice Under an Imperfect Ability to Choose.” American Economic Review 84:419–440.Google Scholar
Franklin, J. 1988. “Structural and Functional Diversity in Temperate Forests.” In Biodiversity, Wilson, E. O., ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp. 166–175.Google Scholar
Green, W. 1997. Econometric Analysis. Macmillan Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
Hammond, K., Hursch, C., and Todd, F.. 1964. “Analyzing the Components of Clinical Inference.” Psychological Review 71:438–456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammond, K., Rohrbaugh, J., Mumpower, J., and Adelman, L.. 1977. “Social Judgment Theory: Applications in Policy Formation.” In Human Judgment and Decision Processes in Applied Settings, Kaplan, M. and Schwartz, S., eds. Academic Press, New York, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
Holling, C. S., Gunderson, L.H., and Walters, C. J.. 1994. “The Structure and Dynamics of the Everglades System: Guidelines for Ecosystem Restoration.” In Everglades—The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Davis, S. and Ogden, J., eds. St Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.Google Scholar
Hursch, C., Hammond, K., and Hursch, J.. 1964. “Some Methodological Considerations in Multiple-Cue Probability Studies.” Psychological Review 71:42–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaibi, M.R. and Raa, T.. 1998. “The Additive Structure of Utility in Discrete Choice Models.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 28:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, F. R., and Desvousges, W. H.. 1997. “Estimating Stated Preferences with Rated-Pair Data: Environmental, Health, and Employment Effects of Energy Programs.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 34:79–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeney, R., and Raiffa, H.. 1976. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Kellert, S. R. 1996. The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society. Island Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Kleindorfer, P., Kunreuther, H., and Schoemaker, P.. 1993. Decision Sciences: An Integrative Perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Light, S., and Dineen, J.. 1994. “Water Control in the Everglades: A Historical Perspective.” In Everglades—The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Davis, S. and Ogden, J., eds. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.Google Scholar
Louviere, J. J. 1988. Analyzing Decision Making: Metric Conjoint Analysis. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, 95 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manski, C. 1977. “The Structure of Random Utility Models.” Theory and Decision 8:229–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFadden, D. 1974. “Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior.” In Frontiers in Econometrics, Zarembka, P., ed. Academic Press, New York, pp. 105–142.Google Scholar
Milon, J. W., Kiker, C.F., and Lee, D. J.. 1998. “Adaptive Ecosystem Management and the Florida Everglades: More Than Trial-and-Error?” Water Resources Update No. 113 (Fall):37–46.Google Scholar
Milon, J. W., Hodges, A.W., Rimal, A., Kiker, C. F., and Casey, F.. 1999. Public Preferences and Economic Values for Restoration of the Everglades/South Florida Ecosystem. Economics Report 99–1. Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Ogden, J. C. 1994. “A Comparison of Wading Bird Nesting Dynamics (1931–1946 and 1974–1989) as an Indication of Ecosystem Conditions in the Southern Everglades.” In Everglades—The Ecosystem and Its Restoration, Davis, S. and Ogden, J., eds. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL.Google Scholar
Opaluch, J., Swallow, S., Weaver, T., Wessels, C., and Wichelns, D.. 1993. “Evaluating Impacts from Noxious Facilities: Including Public Preferences in Current Siting Mechanisms.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 24:41–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, G. L., and Brown, T. C.. 1998. “Economic Valuation by the Method of Paired Comparison, with Emphasis on Evaluation of the Transitivity Axiom.” Land Economics 74:240–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute. 1996. “The FACTEX Procedure.” SAS Procedures Guide. Cary, NC, pp. 209–235.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. 1927. “A Law of Comparative Judgment.” Psychological Review 4:273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
US Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Comprehensive Review Study: Reconnaissance Report, Vol. 1. Jacksonville, FL.Google Scholar
US Army Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District. 1999. Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. Jacksonville, FL.Google Scholar
Vogel, C. C. 1998. “Central & Southern Florida Project Comprehensive Review Study: Road Map or Roadblock for the Future?” Water Resources Update No. 111 (Spring):83–97.Google Scholar
von Winterfeldt, D., and Edwards, W.. 1986. Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Westman, W. 1991. “Ecological Restoration Projects: Measuring Their Performance.” The Environmental Professional 13 (3):207–215.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. 1984. Biophilia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar