An official website of the United States government
Despite the broader acknowledgement of shared responsibilities in emergency management, one of the hidden and overlooked issues in disaster literature is the integration of multi-sector stakeholder values: the things that are of importance to the stakeholders (e.g., safety, profit, electability). Stakeholders (e.g., different levels of government, the private sector, the non-profit sector, and the communities) hold numerous values with varying degrees of importance, forming a system of value priorities. Stakeholder values and value priorities—referred to as value systems—are not static in a disaster context; they are dynamic, time-sensitive, and event-driven. A more in-depth understanding of the dynamics of stakeholder value systems is surely needed to allow policy-makers to introduce more pro-active and timely measures towards more resilient communities. To address this need, this paper focuses on identifying and understanding the stakeholder values in the context of Hurricane Michael. Semi-structured interviews (n=24 with 30 interviewees) were conducted to understand what public and private stakeholders value in different phases of Hurricane Michael. Based on the interview results, ten stakeholder values were identified: safety, resource efficiency, natural resource preservation, culture preservation, community growth, community adaptability, community cohesion, social welfare improvement, personal achievement, and business development. This study advances the knowledge in the area of disasters by empirically investigating public and private stakeholder values across different phases of the disaster. Such knowledge will help practitioners implement disaster resilience strategies in a way that accounts for diverse stakeholder needs and priorities, thus facilitating human-centered decision making towards building more resilient communities.
more »
« less
Decision Support Frameworks in Solid Waste Management: A Systematic Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making with Sustainability and Social Indicators
Waste management is a critical sector that needs to co-ordinate its activities with outcomes that impact society. Multi-criteria decision-making methods for waste management have been widely considered using environmental and economic criteria. With the development of new social regulations and concerns, sustainable waste management needs to additionally target socially acceptable practices. Despite the need to aid solid waste management decision-makers in contemplating the three pillars of sustainability, a limited inclusion of social impact has been found in the multi-objective decision-making literature. This study presents a systematic literature review of multi-criteria decision-making methods in solid waste management. The purpose of this study is threefold. (1) Emphasize the application of multi-objective decision-making methods, summarizing the models that have been used and their applications; (2) provide insights into the quantification of social aspects and their inclusion in decision-making methods, providing a list of social indicators collected from the reviewed studies; (3) offer an analysis of stakeholders’ involvement in waste management. From the articles investigated, one can observe the importance of understanding the local context in which the waste management system is located and the necessity of community consultation to recognize the potential challenges and improvements to solid waste management systems. Consequently, the involvement of stakeholders is crucial during the quantification process of social indicators. In alignment with the findings and needs raised by this review, a methodological approach is suggested for integrating optimization, social aspects, and stakeholders under a waste management context.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2049210
- PAR ID:
- 10560643
- Publisher / Repository:
- MDPI
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Sustainability
- Volume:
- 15
- Issue:
- 18
- ISSN:
- 2071-1050
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 13316
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Contemporary wildlife disease management is complex because managers need to respond to a wide range of stakeholders, multiple uncertainties, and difficult trade‐offs that characterize the interconnected challenges of today. Despite general acknowledgment of these complexities, managing wildlife disease tends to be framed as a scientific problem, in which the major challenge is lack of knowledge. The complex and multifactorial process of decision‐making is collapsed into a scientific endeavor to reduce uncertainty. As a result, contemporary decision‐making may be oversimplified, rely on simple heuristics, and fail to account for the broader legal, social, and economic context in which the decisions are made. Concurrently, scientific research on wildlife disease may be distant from this decision context, resulting in information that may not be directly relevant to the pertinent management questions. We propose reframing wildlife disease management challenges as decision problems and addressing them with decision analytical tools to divide the complex problems into more cognitively manageable elements. In particular, structured decision‐making has the potential to improve the quality, rigor, and transparency of decisions about wildlife disease in a variety of systems. Examples of management of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, white‐nose syndrome, avian influenza, and chytridiomycosis illustrate the most common impediments to decision‐making, including competing objectives, risks, prediction uncertainty, and limited resources.more » « less
-
The objective of this paper is to establish a meta-network framework to identify constituents in Disaster Management System-of-Systems (DM-SoS), conceptualize relationships and interactions among the constituents, and formulate quantitative measurements of DM-SoS performance for achieving network-centric operation and coordination in the context of disasters. With increasingly serious impacts of disasters on interdependent and heterogeneous systems, the improvement of effective and integrative disaster response and coordination is needed. However, some existing literature only proposed some frameworks for modeling disaster management systems, while another stream of studies only examined the social network analysis (SNA) for understanding the interactions between stakeholders. Thus, quantitative and integrative measurements in DM-SoS are missing. To address this knowledge gap, the authors created and discussed a metanetwork framework integrating various types of entities and relationships for quantitatively analyzing the performance of DM-SoS. First, this framework defined nodes and links in meta-metrics for abstracting constituents in disaster management. Second, some performance indicators (e.g., effectiveness, the extent of information sharing, and the extent of self-organization) were created to show the capacities of disaster systems, and the potential perturbations in disaster environment were translated by network theory. Finally, we examined the impacts of perturbations on the indicators and assessed the performance by integrating overall indicators. This study highlighted the significance of quantitative measurements and an integrative perspective on analyzing efficiency and effectiveness of disaster response and coordination. The study also provides implications for making comparisons of different response strategies for decision makers to achieve resilient disaster management systems.more » « less
-
There has been a growing interest in research on how to define and build indicators of resilience to address challenges associated with sea-level rise. Most of the proposed methods rely on lagging indicators constructed based on the historical performance of an infrastructure sub-system. These indicators are traditionally utilized to build curves that describe the past response of the sub-system to stressors; these curves are then used to predict the future resilience of the sub-system to hypothesized events. However, there is now a growing concern that this approach cannot provide the best insights for adaptive decision-making across the broader context of multiple sub-systems and stakeholders. As an alternative, leading indicators that are built on the structural characteristics that embody system resilience have been gaining in popularity. This structure-based approach can reveal problems and gaps in resilience planning and shed light on the effectiveness of potential adaptation activities. Here, we survey the relevant literature for these leading indicators within the context of sea-level rise and then synthesize the gained insights into a broader examination of the current research challenges. We propose research directions on leveraging leading indicators as effective instruments for incorporating resilience into integrated decision-making on the adaptation of infrastructure systems.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Although the need for urgent climate change action is clear, insights about how to make better climate risk management decisions are limited. While significant attention from behavioral researchers has focused on choice architecture, we argue that many of the contexts for addressing climate risks require increased attention to the needs of a deliberative and dynamic choice environment. A key facet of this kind of decision is the need for decision-makers and stakeholders to identify and balance conflicting economic, social and environmental objectives. This recognition of difficult, context-specific trade-offs highlights the need for structuring the decision-making process so that objectives are clearly articulated and prioritized. Equally, policy analyses and deliberations must effectively link priorities with climate risk management options. This restructuring of decision-making about climate change calls for more than a nudge. Scientific and technical efforts must be redirected to help stakeholders and decision-makers better understand the diverse implications of climate change management alternatives and to become better equipped to take actions commensurate with the urgency of the problem.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3390/su151813316
