Participatory and multiobjective development of water course regulation – Towards collaborative planning by using decision tools
Olli-Matti Verta and Mika Marttunen

Finnish Environment Institute
P.O.Box 140, 00251 Helsinki, Finland
E-mails: olli-matti.verta@ymparisto.fi, mika.marttunen@ymparisto.fi

Abstract 
Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods has been successfully applied in many environmental problems (e.g. Gregory & Keeney 1994, Hostmann et. al. 2004b, Kangas & Kangas 2005, Marttunen & Hämäläinen 1995, Marttunen & Suomalainen 2004). The main goals have been to structure and to analyse multifaceted and complex problems, to compare incommensurable impacts and to clarify the preference order of alternatives (e.g. Greening & Bernow 2004, Keeney et. al. 1996, Reichert et. al. 2004, Hostmann et. al. 2004a). Most of the MCDA tools concentrate on describing the choice among the alternatives. The choice often occurs at the end of the decision-making process, but the process can be assisted with MCDA tools also earlier (Marttunen & Suomalainen 2004).
In the lake Koitere regulation development project, we used decision analysis methods to structure the problem and to clarify stakeholders' objectives as well as to create different regulation policy alternatives and future management strategies. The overall goal of the lake regulation development project of the lake Koitere is to create a new more sustainable regulation policy and management strategy for the lake.
In this presentation, we describe how Value-Focused Thinking (Keeney 1992) was applied in order to gather, clarify and structure the objectives for the development project. Furthermore, we will describe how MCDA based model was applied to create  target regulations for 15 stakeholders. In the personal interviews, the model was applied to seek such target water levels for different times of year which would meet stakeholders' values concerning ecological, social and economical impacts. We also demonstrate how these target regulations were applied in the generation of new regulation alternatives. Finally, we analyse the general applicability of this approach to regulation development projects.
References
Greening L.A., Bernow S. (2004). Design of coordinated energy and environmental policies: use of multi-criteria decision-making. Energy Policy 32, 721-735.
Gregory, R., Keeney, R.L. (1994). Creating policy alternatives using stakeholder values. Management Science 40(8), 1035-1048.
Hostmann M., Truffer B., Reichert P. and Borsuk M. (2004a). Stakeholder values in decision support for river rehabilitation. Submitted to the Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (JMCDA) September 15, 2004.
Hostmann M., Mosler H-J., Reichert P. and Truffer B. (2004b). Multi-attribute value theory as a framework for conflict resolution in river rehabilitation. Submitted to Large Rivers supplement of the Archiv fur Hydrobiologie July 1, 2004.
Kangas J., Kangas A. (2005). Multiple criteria decision support in forest management – the approach, methods applied, and experiences gained. Forest Ecology and Management 207, 133-143.
Keeney R.L. (1992). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Keeney R.L., McDaniels T.L. and Ridge-Cooney V.L. (1996). Using values in planning facilities for metropolitan Seattle. Water Resources Bulletin 32(2), 293-303.
Marttunen, M., Hämäläinen, R.P. (1995). Decision analysis interviews in environmental impact assessment. European Journal of Operational Research 87(3), 551-563.
Marttunen M., Suomalainen M. (2004). Participatory and multiobjective development of water regulation – creation of regulation alternatives from stakeholders' preferences. Manuscript 1.10.2004.
Reichert P., Borsuk M., Hostmann M., Schweizer S., Spörri C., Tockner K. and Truffer B. (2004). Concepts of decision support for river rehabilitation. Submitted to Environmental Modelling and Software September, 2004.
Related Web links
Project Web pages:
Lake Koitere project: http://www.ilomantsi.fi/Resource.phx/kunta/kunta-ilomantsi/koitere/koitere.htx