Multiple-attribute evaluation of ecosystem management for the Missouri River system

被引:56
作者
Prato, T [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Missouri, Ctr Agr Resource & Environm Syst, Columbia, MO 65211 USA
关键词
multiple attribute evaluation; ecosystem management; Missouri River system;
D O I
10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00077-6
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Multiple attribute evaluation is used to score and rank five management alternatives for the Missouri River system developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Alternatives are characterized by 10 attributes, namely flood control, hydropower, recreation, Missouri River navigation, water supply, fish and wildlife, interior drainage, groundwater, historic properties and Mississippi River navigation. Since preferences for the attributes are unknown, alternatives are compared using four hypothetical attribute-weighting schemes. Utility scores for the alternatives obtained using a linear additive utility function indicate that the modified conservation plan (MCP), which incorporates adaptive management, increased drought conservation measures, changes in Fort Peck dam releases and unbalanced levels in the upper three reservoirs, is preferred to the current water control plan (CWCP) with the neutral, pro-recreation/fish and wildlife, and pro-fish and wildlife weights. MCP ranked above the four Gavins Point (GP) alternatives except with the pro-fish and wildlife weights. CWCP is more preferred than the four GP options with the neutral and pro-agriculture weights and less preferred with the pro-recreation/fish and wildlife and pro-fish and wildlife weights. The GP option with the lowest reduction in summer flow and smallest spring rise (GPA) ranks above the GP option with the highest spring rise and greatest reduction in summer flow (GPB), a spring rise only (GPC) and a lower summer flow only (GPD). (C) 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:297 / 309
页数:13
相关论文
共 56 条
[11]  
FAUSCH KD, 1988, PNW213 US FOR SERV
[12]  
GEHLBACH F R, 1975, Biological Conservation, V8, P79, DOI 10.1016/0006-3207(75)90033-6
[13]  
HAETTENSCHWILER P, 1994, DECISION SUPPORT SYS
[14]   MULTIOBJECTIVES IN WATER-RESOURCE SYSTEMS-ANALYSIS - SURROGATE WORTH TRADE OFF METHOD [J].
HAIMES, YY ;
HALL, WA .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1974, 10 (04) :615-624
[15]  
HESSE LW, 1988, SPECIAL PUBLICATION, V8
[16]  
*INT FLOODPL MAN R, 1994, SHAR CHALL FLOODPL 5
[17]  
Janssen R., 1992, MULTIOBJECTIVE DECIS
[18]   Fynbos (fine bush) vegetation and the supply of water: a comparison of multi-criteria decision analysis and cost-benefit analysis [J].
Joubert, AR ;
Leiman, A ;
deKlerk, HM ;
Katua, S ;
Aggenbach, LC .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 1997, 22 (02) :123-140
[19]   AN APPROACH TO PUBLIC-PARTICIPATION IN STRATEGIC FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANNING [J].
KANGAS, J .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 1994, 70 (1-3) :75-88
[20]   INTEGRATING BIODIVERSITY INTO FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING [J].
KANGAS, J ;
KUUSIPALO, J .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 1993, 61 (1-2) :1-15